Skip to comments.Turnout shaping up to be lower than 2008 (and 2004)
Posted on 11/07/2012 6:01:47 AM PST by RightGeek
A drop in voter turnout in Tuesday's election didn't keep President Barack Obama from winning a second term in the White House.
Preliminary figures suggest fewer people voted this year than four years ago, when voters shattered turnout records as they elected Obama to his first term.
In most states, the numbers are shaping up to be even lower than in 2004, said Curtis Gans, the director of American University's Center for the Study of the American Electorate. Still, the full picture may not be known for weeks, because much of the counting takes place after Election Day.
"By and large, people didn't show up," Gans said.
In Texas, turnout for the presidential race dropped almost 11 percent from 2008. Vermont and South Carolina saw declines that were almost as large. The drop-off was more than 7 percent in Maryland, where voters approved a ballot measure allowing gay marriage.
With 95 percent of precincts reporting, The Associated Press figures showed more than 117 million people had voted in the White House race, but that number will go up as more votes are counted. In 2008, 131 million people voted, according to the Federal Election Commission.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
59 Million people voted for McCain in 2008, and 56 Million people voted for Romnet in 2012? Makes no sense.
Voter alienation. They figure they can’t change anything anymore so don’t bother voting.
I run into people like this all the time now.
face it, many conservatives stayed home again, because conservatism wasn’t on the ballot.
These turnout figures don’t mean anything anymore. With all the voter registration drives that just add names to the lists, there’s no way to tell if they really reflect apathy or what.
I’m not buying what Obamas lapdogs are selling. My rural precinct ran out of ballots. The MSM lies but you believe them NOW?
Truly stunning. WE didn’t care. WE conservatives did not turn out. Words fail me.
Voter fatigue. I ran into many of such people. Just tired of politics, all the ads on TV. When that happens, the race will go to the superior GOTV efforts. The Democrats are MUCH better at that then the GOP. That is probably the bottom line. You can talk principles and ideals all you want, but it all depends on who actually gets their people to vote, and they do it much better than we do.
Perhaps someone needs to compare the states using electronic votes to paper scans.
At the end, when they finish counting in CA and WA, and also total the absentee ballots in some states, it will be Obama 61.5 mil, Romney 58.5 mil votes, or very close to that.
Note that McCain (or should I say Palin) got 60 mil votes, and W in 2004 got 62 million.
Romney was a weak, unispiring candidate, he did not get the voters to the polls, he was worse than McCain.
I’ve heard that “Evangelicals” stayed home. I guess they’d rather have a muslim than a Mormon.
Looks like a whole lot of voters stayed home.
Republicans are dying out as the the WWII generation ebbs away and they are not being replaced in equal numbers.
From my perspectives conservatives were fired up. Early voting polling results reported much higher amounts of Republicans at early voting, the DEM numbers were significantly down, Independents were breaking for Romney, the Romney political rallies were full. Early voting and election day the lines were endless in Florida.
It simply doesn’t make sense that after all the added unemployment and government abuse, that suddenly 3 Million conservatives were simply not interested in voting in 2012, but voted in 2008.
This thread is an excellent example of why the people don't march on Washington and why NOTHING will change.
Yes, a lot of voters stayed home but far more stayed home for Obama than Romney.
I confess that I did not vote for Romney.I couldn’t see myself casting a vote for another liberal. But, the GOP could have run Reagan or Goldwater and it would not have mattered. Free birth control and food stamps won the day
Bingo. The purists re-elected the Muslim.
Bingo. The purists re-elected the Muslim by sitting out.
But but..............the biased press says it’s TRUE! You believe them....................don’t you?
I think you are right and it was the conservatives who stayed home. His Excellency’s vote was far less than it was in 08 while the RR vote was somewhat less than McLames. Issues were the same so it was not issue oriented. Voter apathy stonger among conservatives perhaps because they feel no matter which, it is 4 years of the same or similar...not the fork in the road candidate we needed. Now would the RINOs have voted for the enigma? I doubt it so IMO had the conservatives turned out as strong as 08 when admittedly their vote was down there also, we would have had a different outcome.
The purists sat out the election.
Where you been? Many Freepers have been telling this board for months that we were staying home if Romney was the nominee.
Now you’re all surprised?
There is a rule of politics that massive negative ads by both sides are neutral but have the effect of lowering turnout.
That may be a part of the hidden story of 2012.
Or maybe we thought that there was little difference between RomneyCare or ObamaCare, so why bother?
The GOP could have made Healthcare a salient issue for this election but decided not to when they put up Romney.
Yes but again as I pointed out in another thread, McCain’s extra votes were probably coming from the south and already deep red states thanks to Palin. In reality even with more votes McCain lost more states and lost by a larger margin in places like Fl, VA, and OH.
Just like you, I find that this makes no sense. How did a tired old man (McCain) attract more votes after four years of chaos...when I apply Occam’s Razor to the question the unpleasant possibility is that we have three million more formerly productive people relying on government largesse due to the the shrinking private sector. Knowing what the administration is capable of, I am open to seeing evidence of massive fraud (’by any means necessary’). Honestly, though, I think that our DWTS nation is pretty comfortable in it’s current decline.
It makes perfect sense. McCain, as sad as he was, was always better on social conservative issues in his history. Romney was just an all around awful candidate for conservatives.
We told them this over and over and over again.
Turnout was up at my precinct but down considerably countywide (My county still went to Romney)
The life of our country was on the line - I believe the “christians” sat on their hands. “I ain’t voting for no steenkin’ Mormon”. Good job - go read your bible look up something about reaping what you sow - off to my pity party.
Oh and sorry Israel, you’re on your own. Don’t worry “christians”, their just steekin’ joos.
Conservatives who didn’t vote for Romney on principle, aided Obama’s reelection.
They have that right, but it’s like painting the kitchen while the house is still on fire.
I wish our side would be more practical and vote to elect the candidate of the two that MOST represents your values. That’s how the Dems keep winning.
The “tired old man” had Palin, she got a lot of the GOP voters to the polls. Now, perhaps she got a lot of Dem voters to the polls as well, so it’s hard to gauge her net effect, but clearly she contributed a lot to McCain’s total.
Romney was not a good candidate, and Ryan did absolutely nothing for him as well. In 2004 W got 62 million votes. Adjusting for demographic trends, it would translate to 65-66 million votes today. Romney got 58.5 million at most.
He left 6-7 million GOP voters sitting at home, and no wonder.
Next time maybe we’ll get an actual conservative.
Bush gave us John Roberts so that didn’t work out too well did it?
Let me help you with that: Palin fantastically enthused the base so that millions more voted for her ticket than they did for the charisma- and issues-limited Romney and Ryan.
Still, there are nearly 100 million people who would easily vote Republican if they all went to the polls, but a large number of them simply don't vote, or they vote selectively.
First guy to get bit by the phenomenon was George Bush (papa) when he lied to people about NO NEW TAXES then went along with a Democrat tax increase. Now the Democrats have found out about this TWO NATIONAL ELECTIONS IN A ROW. Obama still holds the turnout record he set in 2008. But in 2010 30 million Democrats who'd voted in 2008 just stayed home. This time it looks like maybe 10 million Democrats just stayed home!
Those are huge numbers of voters to exhibit such behavior!
Over the last two months we have interviewed 15 people in hopes of once again starting to expand our numbers to pre-economic collapse;(approx 135). However we could do nothing in terms of hiring until after the election.. Obamacare is going to impact us greatly. In short, we are now looking at hiring 2 of those individuals due to them being prime candidates for a new Dept. we are starting, and unfortunately looking at laying off 2 members of the work force to offset this. We have also, over the last two months, contemplated 32 hour work weeks and have done some trial runs with volunteers under the guise of a decreased work load.
My point is every step of the way our president, who is very politically outspoken, had not only been straight forward with management, but also the workforce on what this election could mean.
The result??? A quick walk through of the facility and some chit chat yesterday indicated exactly SIX people were planning to vote. Less than 10% of people who KNEW this election would have a guaranteed impact on their jobs. This in the state of PA. by the way.
What can you possibly due in the face of that kind of indifference?
With the conservative base aging, the influx of immigrants, and young people being indoctrinated as liberals, we have become a center-left country.
That was what CNN was saying when looking at exit polling data in VA. Evangelicals stayed home and then we have to ask, how many are left in this morally corrupt country to make a difference anyway?
Here’s a video of a voting machine expert (court testimony) who explains how votes can be manipulated on the voting machines. “The central tabulator’s data is extremely easy to manipulate”...
For example, a WiFi or Bluetooth card can be hidden within the computer underneath the motherboard to remotely manipulate large numbers of votes. Or someone can also manually upload large amounts of votes multiple times (reloading memory cards multiple times in a precinct / while destroying the paper trail at precincts).
If democrats believed all the news stories of Republicans “stealing the election”, they would have no problems tampering with votes on their side.
The message we are sending to the GOP-E:
Nominate a conservative or we sit on our hands. We’re not bluffing.
Get pissed off if you want, tell us we’re screwing over the country, tell us we’re helping Obama, I don’t give a crap.
But I am NOT voting for a liberal no matter whose party ID he happens to be wearing.
In the end just about as many people, Evangelicals included, voted for Romney as voted for McCain!
The blame must be accepted by the GOP-e and their feckless campaign analysts. They really screwed up.
Yep ..both candidates had less (Obama had a lot less so it’s true people were less enthused about him but didn’t turn to Romney, instead stayed home). Romney picked up two more states than McCain and was closer in OH, and VA than McCain.
And now those 7 million (along with the rest of us) are left with the expected result of that inaction...4 more years of Obama and a Democrat stranglehold on the Senate. The Dems hope that conservatives vote/not vote on pure principal in 2016 too. It's making it easy for them.
Its over. You sohould see the comments on my facebook page - we are heading to communism.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, followed always by a dictatorship. The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations has been 200 years.
~ Alexander Fraser Tytler, Scottish-born British lawyer and writer, 1747 - 1813.
With all due respect, that THRILLS the DNC.
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.