59 Million people voted for McCain in 2008, and 56 Million people voted for Romnet in 2012? Makes no sense.
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.
2008:
OBama 69,297,997
McCain: 59,597,520
2012
Obama: 54,773,837
Romney 53,716,689
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.
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?
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.
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!
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 world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”
~ Alexander Fraser Tytler, Scottish-born British lawyer and writer, 1747 - 1813.
Sure it does.
There were at least a two hundred thousand people who would never vote for Barry but also were convinced they couldn't vote for a Mormon. Add in about that same number who would never vote for a Catholic and you have a nice portion of that two million fewer voters.
A neighbor of mine who goes to an independent Evangelical church said his pastor preached this past Sunday about why everyone should just stay home rather than voting for a ticket with a Mormon and a Catholic. Just look at the constant stream of posts on FR making the argument that no one who is a Christian should ever vote for a Mormon. It's not at all difficult to believe there were a large number of people who agreed with that argument or for whom it was the final straw that kept them from bothering to vote since they didn't like Romney that much to begin with.
Add to that the fact a good number of Christian black folks have had second thoughts about Barry but would never vote against him and you have a good start at figuring out why there were two million fewer voters than 08. One thing for sure, there are an awful lot of people who don't care enough about their country to even bother to vote and as long as that's the case it'll be the people who vote because they're promised more goodies who choose the President.
The real democrat strategy all along was to suppress the Republican and Independent turnout any way they could and there are plenty of fifth columnists who threw in with them with arguments against Mormons, projections of a landslide, and so on. Romney didn't motivate people like Newt did so there was nothing to counter the constant stream of reasons to not bother with voting. Whether or not Romney was worth a crap wasn't ever the question, whether or not you gave a damn about your country was and it looks like plenty of people claim to care but actually are just like little kids who take their toys and go home when things don't go their way.
Wait a couple of years. Barry will reduce the number of hospitals by around twenty percent by forcing Catholic hospitals to close. He'll reduce the number of doctors by about half by forcing them to either be a party to all sorts of malpractice dictated by government panels or quitting. And if that doesn't cheer up the electorate enough, he'll be sure to reduce the number of full time jobs by another five or six million.
That's when all the "good people" who sat this election out will be crying and wringing their hands while they wonder how God could let this happen to them and their country. I've seen the same sort of thing before when the very same people who dodged the draft, protested the war, and were all for cutting defense spending were shocked and upset that Iran wasn't afraid to take hostages and that the military couldn't manage to rescue the hostages in Iran.