Posted on 11/10/2008 8:04:53 AM PST by TitansAFC
A look at vaious exit polls (including the linked ones):
Looks like Party ID in three exit polls Favored the Democrats 39%D/32%R/29%I (+7% Democrats).
A breakdown of several exit polls provides the following observations: (Good news/bad news)
1.) Women are increasingly outvoting men. This is bad news because women always vote majority Democrat, always. No exceptions. We need to increase registration of male voters, as well as turnout.
2.) Latinos (and Asians) gave their largest margin to a candidate - almost 3:1 Democrats to GOP. The GOP needs to address this, preferably by finding more Conservative Latino/Asian candidates, especially in House races out west.
3.) Youth vote was high, but not historically so. As usual, they voted for the Socialist.
4.) At first glance, one wonders how Obama gets 20% of the "Conservative" vote. A look into several polls reveals the following: Social and Gun Conservatives came out hard for McCain, people who call themselves "Conservative" because of fiscal issues gave Obama a nice cross-over. The moral I get from that story?: The same GOP folks who demanded right-wingers nominate a more moderate McCain (as opposed to a more Conservative candidate - because polarizing Social/Moral issues "do damage") in 2012 were the same ones who crossed-over for Obama after we nominated their candidate. Buckley, Powell, etc., were symptomatic after all.
5.) Some good news: current numbers and turnout gap are basically impossible to maintain for the Democrats. Despite the record numbers, the race was relatively close, even in the state-by-state results. This is a good sign that the GOP GOTV will produce victories in 2010, and perhaps 2012.
6.) Some bad news: turnout changes and issue ranking in the state exit polls show it's going to be harder and harder to win Senate seats in blue states unless we suck-it-up and accept some dreaded, wishy-washy RINOs. Did I mention this is not good news?
Nationally, the anti-GOP trend obviously dies in January. The trend will naturally start shifting our way slowly, and I think it is clear that a Reagan Conservative can win nationally again in 2012. Unfortunately, a Reagan Conservative cannot win us Senate seats these days in blue states. So where to go from here? The thread is open for comments........
FYI.
Also....the link should be cnn.com, not cn.com. Sorry!
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
“2.) Latinos (and Asians) gave their largest margin to a candidate - almost 3:1 Democrats to GOP. The GOP needs to address this, preferably by finding more Conservative Latino/Asian candidates, especially in House races out west.”
This spells trouble given demographics. Failing to do anything about the illegal problem has led to a generation of citizen children of illegals who can now vote and who vote for the party that promises them more loot. And it will get worse. Just go to a kindegarten class in my area. There is an electoral bomb that will be dropped in the next couple election cycles and it will make winning a lot harder.
The GOP doesn't find candidates. It protects incumbents.
Amen to that.
I still can’t understand how a so-called fiscal conservative votes for a socialist.
does. not. compute.
“A look into several polls reveals the following: Social and Gun Conservatives came out hard for McCain, people who call themselves “Conservative” because of fiscal issues gave Obama a nice cross-over. “
We badly hurt ourselves with those concerned with those who are primarly concerned with fiscal issues during the six years we had a Republican congress and a Republican in the White House. Those folks don’t see us as credible when it comes to rhetoric about fiscal responsability after that. And can you blame them? We acted like Dems and its cost us two straight cycles.
There is absolutely no reason the GOP did not take out Tim Johnson in SD. He was ripe to be beaten by a solid GOP'er from that state. We need to recruit such 2 years out.
As for Blue States, we need to make those choices, best choices that are actually available to us. That means, of course no, deep conservative is going be elected in such States and we should not expect such (in the short term). We should however, not cede these States to DEMs, but put up the best type RHINOs we can find (such as Coleman, in MN) and learn to operate within such men in our party. They are needed.
What the Republicans should do is consistently stay on a small government, low tax message. Whatever the Democrats propose, stay on this message. Heck, maybe they should support Obama’s middle class tax cut. It was the most popular part of Obama’s platform.
Alternatively, you need to spend some time pondering the possibility that the problem is fundamentally un-addressable.
2.) At www.Thirth-Thousand.org they make a good argument for having 1 Representative per 100,000 citizens. If there are 300-million Americans, then there should be 30,000 Representatives. They argue that from 1790 through 1910 that House Representatives grew with the population. Why it stopped at 435 does not necessarily have to remain that way. We the people would be more effectively and better representated and not less.
It's almost unheard of for either side to hold power, either in presidential elections or House/Senate, for more than 30 years. The Dems got a little more mileage out of WW II, or they probably would have been booted earlier, too.
Many of the same demographics that Republicans thought were working against them in the late 1900s (lots of Irish and Italians) now provide GOP with some of their more reliable voters.
It may well be possible that until the people get truly appalled at Obama's policies---which they won't see for months---they won't re-think things. As "Obi Wan" said, "elections are blunt instruments." On the map, this looks like a landslide, but in terms of turnout, what might have been, this easily could have been a narrow McCain win. The first thing is to make sure that Rs vote R. That killed us in OH, where McCain got 500,000 votes fewer than Bush in 04.
This election wasn’t about conservative vs liberal.
It was about good vs evil. God made it clear - here’s your choice. Choose, and live or die with that choice.
It’s delusional to think it’s all about finding the right candidate and saying the right things during the campaign.
Obama should have been defeated by “ANY Republican.” Americans shouldn’t need to know more than that he is a Marxist, vehemently pro-abortion, and a rube on foreign policy.
What we need is to wake up and realize that we got beat on the ground, in turnout and through early (usually that means “casual”) voting.
It’s not someone else’s fault. It’s our fault, by that I mean it’s up to us, the rank and file, to do more, and to learn more about how to do more, to GOTV in this new age.
It isn’t. It does require ‘selling’ conservative ideas.
Why not tax businesses? Because they pass the tax on to buyers, so everyone who buys gas, electricity or cars pays more in taxes...it just is collected via a business and isn’t ‘progressive’.
Why allow guns? Because cops can only protect you AFTER the fact, and poor people live in areas where crime is critical.
Etc. McCain tried to reach out via “Lets have more illegals become citizens’, and it didn’t sell.
Don’t pander. Conservative ideas work for EVERYONE. There is no reason to assume a young hispanic trying to get ahead doesn’t need conservative values...but all he hears is pandering.
We need to earn their vote, not abandon it.
Adhere to the Constitution and vote on election day.... allow for absentees ballots but have the ability to trace who gets one.
Clean the voter rolls starting NOW!!!
Require that all military ballots be counted NO matter how long it takes ‘mail’ services to return them.
I still thing the RNC needs to include support of Entrepreneurs and Cottage Industry in its agenda.
AND first and foremost, have the National Black Republican Association involved in agenda planning.
The House of Representatives is an anachronism, especially in terms of voting on legislation.
We do not need a representative to vote for us. We are more than technologically capable of doing our own voting. Reps may be needed to craft legislation, but there is certainly no need for their vote. The same applies to state legislatures.
One of the few things keeping me going Tuesday was looking at the vote count on Drudge.
It reminded me that tens of millions of my fellow Americans chose good over evil.
If African-American turnout had been the same in VA, NC, OH, PA and IN in 2008 as it is for even a beloved white candidate like Bill Clinton, McCain would be President.
4 million votes decided this election. Depending on what turnout numbers you're looking at, African-American turnout was 4-4.5 million higher than it was in 2004.
Unmarried women and African-Americans are the key demographics for the Democrats. As one can guess, there is enormous overlap in the two categories.
BTW, the analysis that the conservatives need to lean further left is rubbish. That's what lost them the election. People elected Republicans because they wanted to get the government out of their lives, instead the Repubs significantly expanded government.
Do you mean do away with the Representative Republic in favor of a direct Democracy?
That would be like voting for American Idol or Dancing With The Stars on everyhing. We wouldn't need a Congress. I don't think that was what the Founders and Framers of the Constitution had envisioned. They were actually afraid of that. All direct (or straight) popular Democracies in history failed, so they took the Represenative Republic model instead.
Again, you need to spend some time pondering the possibility that their votes are fundamentally un-earn-able.
I.e. that the only way their votes can be earned is with cold, hard cash - which is precisely the what the DEMs are offering them.
This idea that all people at all times in human history always share exactly the same values is simply nonsense - and especially this idea that "all people yearn for freedom" is simply ludicrous.
Most people, at most times in human history, have yearned for TYRANNY.
And now the demographics have turned, once and for all, against the American experiment - there are more voters in the USA today [and for the foreseeable future] who yearn for tyranny than who yearn for freedom:
Of U.S. Children Under 5, Nearly Half Are Minorities
Wednesday, May 10, 2006; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/09/AR2006050901841.htmlWhites will be minority group by 2042, Census predicts
Thursday, August 14, 2008
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/48071.html
I would like more information about the female voters and exactly what influences their vote. So many of the interviews I heard it seemed like the women were firmly for Obama, but their spouse ..well not much comment there. Is it really just about abortion or are there other issues? Including the look of the candidate ..and don’t tell me it ain’t so ...Jack proved that a long time ago.
It would be interesing to see the results of marketing survey that put a really gorgeous guy as the prolife choice and some fat ugly old guy as the prochoice ...can they separate the two issues??
Good analysis but some caveats.
1) We need to run RINO’s yes. Better a guy with 50 ACU rating than one with 3.
2) We should still have an advantage in senate races. There are more red-leaning states than blue-leaning ones.
West Virginia’s senate seats should both go GOP once their senators croak. North Dakota’s seat is a prime pickoff next cycle if Obama screws up. We should be dominant in the plain and mountain states.
Arkansas should also be a GOP state. Someone needs to convince Huckabee to run in ‘10.
3) Demographic trends are hurting us, but remember this was a terrible election cycle for republicans. We need someone who is a certified social and fiscal conservative to unite the 2 parts of the party. There is no way we are winning the hispanic vote without a strong social conservative, and there is no way to win over RINO state’s without someone that isn’t also a fiscal conservative. Wishy-washy guys will displease both parts and get us whaled.
4) We need to govern well. That means adhering to our fiscal discipline and actually solving problems. Our brain trust has disintegrated. We must rebuild it so that it can provide effective, market-based solutions to compete against the socialism of the democrats.
You don’t have to be white to want conservative values. However, if someone runs around talking about raising taxes on ‘big business’, and his GOP opponent just says, “Me too!” - well, that isn’t going to convert anyone to conservatism.
We have the right arguments, but our candidate didn’t even try to make them - he’s a semi-socialist himself!
So you trust the same mob that enabled Obama to look at the misleading titles of bills and vote well? It would, however, be a boon to the MSM as they would get all that ad money for "Vote for Pelosi-Reid Constitution is too old and should die" bill.
4.) At first glance, one wonders how Obama gets 20% of the “Conservative” vote. A look into several polls reveals the following: Social and Gun Conservatives came out hard for McCain, people who call themselves “Conservative” because of fiscal issues gave Obama a nice cross-over. The moral I get from that story?: The same GOP folks who demanded right-wingers nominate a more moderate McCain (as opposed to a more Conservative candidate - because polarizing Social/Moral issues “do damage”) in 2012 were the same ones who crossed-over for Obama after we nominated their candidate. Buckley, Powell, etc., were symptomatic after all.
***The RINOs do more damage than good in the GOP. Also here in FR. We need a litmus matrix, not to get rid of them but to reveal them.
Do we need the ACORN of conservative voters!? haha....
1) I would not get rid of the Senate, nor the Presidency. (I also would like to get rid of popular election of Senators, but I think that impractical.) These are more that enough to counteract “the mob”.
2) If we the people were actually involved in legislation, the news media would change drastically and actual legislation would be debated, not opinion polls. Maybe laws will be read before they are enacted?
3) Many would quickly tire of the monotony of voting on specific bills, allowing a self-chosen representative minority -think of it as a poll of the intelligent voters. Professonal lobbying would lose a great deal of influence and orgs would have to take their cases directly to the people.
With the advent of the new communication technologies, most of our antiquated, costly legal and legalistic procedures must go and will someday. But as long as we keep electing lawyers and abiding their arcane, courtly procedures and justifications, we’ll continue to pretend that somehow one elected representative knows the interests of his or her area better than the electorate itself.
Highly unlikely ... most folks, who now vote for politicians based upon what they're spoonfed by the Dinosaur Media, would vote directly based upon what they'd be spoonfed by the DM ... which might be the exact opposite of the actual legislation. I'm quite sure that them DM would produce endless push-polls of the legislation prior to the vote.
Not when ACORN thugs bus them to wherever the election is held ... and pay them to vote.
I think you might be right. Most Latinos do not have a deep understanding or respect for the primacy of freedom that this Country was founded on. They were educated in and know Mexican socialism/corruption. Offer them more material "things" and they will vote for you. When the Obama and McCain amnesty makes 20+ million new, poor, uneducated, government dependent voters, there is little conservatives can do on a National level to win elections.
We blew it.
There's a lot to that, and I think one of Obama's many advantages this year, although little-remarked, is simply that after 8 years people were unlikely to keep the same party in the White House. No matter who the candidate was for either party.
How that plays next time out is hard to guess, mostly because politics and ideology run hard up against events, often with unpredictable results. What is certain is that only democrats will be to blame for at least two years. But only they will get credit, too...
The pendulum ought to swing back our way, but it definitely could use a shove...
I would see the votes taking place by phone or online. I know there are possiblities of fraud, but there always are. It’s really a matter of technology.
On to the media. There will be a lot of BS, but many will want to really know what is going on with actual bills. It will be reported, unlike the state of ignorance we live in now - largely because of the nearly insane committee processes etc in Congress.
I really don’t expect these things to come true soon because the majority want a king to worship or kill - witness pro football coaches. But, IF one was raised knowing the responsiblility of self-government a combination of direct and representative government would separate powers even further. Otherwise the continuing judiciary onslaught will continue.
I don’t really think my propositions will come to pass because
I’m a woman and I say we need to get more men, any men, all men, registered and voting.
We need to get those men sitting on their couches with their baseball caps on backwards with their remotes watching sports and porn (as says Mike Savage).
Men tend to vote GOP.
We need more men registered and voting. Be they Mexican, black, white, single, married, whatever.
Women are voting more because we are responsible. We make the dentist appts for our men and hell, I even filled out the voter’s sample ballot for my husband.
But women too often vote Dem.
So all you Freeper men out there, get your non-voting male friends to start voting! And tell them not to let their Dem wives fill out their sample ballots or absentee ballots for them.
Men are the key.
Team One Obama is coming at us hard and fast, and not going to let us up for a breath.
And if we don't stop Team One in the idea space, Team Two of Obama is coming after our persons directly. That's the way Marxism works.
I agree, but it not just Mexico, but also from several other Central American countries like El Salvador, Guatemala and also the Island countries like Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico. Although, Chile, Brazil & Columbia are making great strides. Chile, as I've read are doing (or have been) things that we could take a lesson...
That said, I don't think Hispanics will ever be the Conservatives that the Cuban exiles were/are. Hispanics from Mexico and the Central American countries are sort of the new African Americans.
Interesting how we don't seem to have the same problems with Korean, Philippine, Indian, Chinese immigrants.
Not being a woman, I cannot answer definitively, but I did hear about a survey taken that 1.) Young, single college-age and post-grad women tended to be liberal. 2. When those women got married, they became more conservative. 3. When those women had children, they became the most conservative (wanted government to say out of the family life and business). 4. When those women got divorced (over 50% now) became even more liberal than pre-marriage. Why? They then want the government to be their husband and father to their children for housing, food, clothing, day care, education, health care...etc.
I don't know how accurate this study is, but that was what I heard.
why have rats captured these groups?
the answer is "for no good reason"...
we need strong Latino candidates....
we can blame immigration but the fact is that Latinos have populated more areas with their own people( Latinos are by definition of Mexican descent but born here IIRC)
Latinos should never be aligned with rats....its a travesty ...Pubs much more represent what Latinos believe....hard work, family values, moving on up in society,God fearing....
Sarah.....LEARN SPANISH...LEARN IT WELL....
The core of the donk appeal to women is that they understood that “people want to be good”. They then defined *good* favorably to themselves in terms of social justice, equality, providing for the general welfare.
We need to find ways to educate women to the good of conservatism. It can be taken as a given that abortion, single motherhood, public schools and paternalistic government are already the default *good* choices of the left. Without lecturing or hectoring or guilting people, we need to get them to accept that our choices and policies are indeed the *good* ones.
The left did this one-on-one with babysitting co-ops, play groups for mothers with pre-schoolers, which gave the moms a place to socialize with other moms, mother & child yoga or other exercise, infant massage, various buying clubs, anything that was free or inexpensive, got the mothers together without needing a babysitter and offered some sort of networking for the moms. Conservative moms probably have lots of ideas that would be appealing to young mothers.
I think we will have to wait until this incarnation of the progressive fantasy fails and fails so dramatically that there is no question as to what is good and what is not. Women will make sure their men and their children vote to the benefit of the women. Our job is to define that benefit.
“there is not a natural relationship between Latinos and blacks nor is there one between Asians and blacks....
why have rats captured these groups?
the answer is “for no good reason”...”
The answer is handouts.
Exqueeze me?
If only a liberal Republican can win, fine. Put up a liberal Republican. But no RINOs. RINOs are worse than useless.
That depends on whether the guy with the 50ACU rating works to undermine conservatives and conservatism. How can conservatives possibly win when the public's image of conservatism is so marred by RINO jerks who are deliberately undermining it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.