What Major Demographic Shift?

American Thinker ^ | 11/8/2012 | Tara Servatius

[Qbert]

Conservatives need to take a collective breath and look closer at the numbers before they buy into the idea that GOP nominee Mitt Romney's defeat was due to some kind of national demographic shift that now makes Democrat presidential candidates' armor impenetrable. Before you give in to the hysteria, here are a few things to keep in mind.

First, Barack Obama's re-election showing was actually pretty unimpressive for a guy whose philosophies voters have supposedly adopted. As of this writing on Wednesday, Obama's vote total stood at an unimpressive 60,119,958. That's about what John Kerry got in 2004 (59,028,444). President George W. Bush actually did far better than Obama in his 2004 reelection quest, posting a vote total that was about 2 million higher (62,040,610) than what Obama got on Tuesday. That's hardly a remarkable finish in a country with a population that has increased. In fact, it's a decline of 9 million votes from Obama's 2008 total.

Had Romney (57,425,441) done as well as McCain did in 2008 (59,934,814), he and Obama would have run neck and neck, virtually matching each other's vote totals. That's hardly the stuff of demographic ruin.

The question Republicans and conservatives need to ask is not why voters showed up for Obama, whose turnout wasn't exactly extraordinary, but why millions of their own voters, people who had pulled the lever for Bush and McCain, didn't do the same for Romney or simply stayed home.

Why did Romney get a full 2 million fewer votes than McCain did? Why did those voters pull the lever for McCain, but not for Romney? Who were they and where did they go? That is what Republican and conservative strategists need to find out.

Is it possible that Republicans and conservative leaning independents just weren't that wild about...

[Qbert]

Food for thought before you capitulate to Jeb 2016...

[cripplecreek]

Mark Levin has given the rallying cry.

MARK LEVIN: We conservatives, we do not accept bipartisanship in the pursuit of tyranny. Period. We will not negotiate the terms of our economic and political servitude. Period. We will not abandon our child to a dark and bleak future. We will not accept a fate that is alien to the legacy we inherited from every single future generation in this country. We will not accept social engineering by politicians and bureaucrats who treat us like lab rats, rather than self-sufficient human beings. There are those in this country who choose tyranny over liberty. They do not speak for us, 57 million of us who voted against this yesterday, and they do not get to dictate to us under our Constitution.

We are the alternative. We will resist. We're not going to surrender to this. We will not be passive, we will not be compliant in our demise. We're not good losers, you better believe we're sore losers! A good loser is a loser forever. Now I hear we're called 'purists.' Conservatives are called purists. The very people who keep nominating moderates, now call us purists the way the left calls us purists. Yeah, things like liberty, and property rights, individual sovereignty, and the Constitution, and capitalism. We're purists now. And we have to hear this crap from conservatives, or pseudo-conservatives, Republicans.

[taildragger]

Jeb? Please, last picture I saw of him he needs to stay away from the Desert Buffet @ the Corral, if ya know what I'm sayin...

Seriously, I think some of it is Conservative's are just dying off. The WWII. Korean and Vietnam Vet's and like minded family members are being replaced by the Beyonce's and J-Zee hipsters that are all about cool and not their education and what they bring to our nation rather than give-me's...

[muawiyah]

Jeb's not even American.

But never mind that, Republicans face a demographic shift called DEAD PEOPLE. When registered Republican voters die they must be replaced by new registered Republican voters.

If they are not replaced with a steady, aggressive, voter registration drive among likely Republican voters, we will lose elections.

By my estimation I don't believe there's been a serious Republican interest in registering new Republicans in Fairfax, Arlington and Alexandria in Northern Virginia in over 12 years. That probably knocks our effective voting strength back about 50% below what it could be.

[Gay State Conservative]

It’s because Romney wasn’t Reagan or Palin.But the sad truth is that neither Reagan nor Palin would have a prayer today.The demographics and the mores *are* shifting and they’re shifting *fast*.Unlike in 1980 just about half of the nation (not 47% as Romney noted) is riding in the wagon as opposed to helping to push it.This is right out of the Ted Kennedy/Saul Alinsky playbook.We have become a nation of victims and that’s *just* the way the Rats want it.

[griswold3]

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president

Check the map! Just because we’re at the mercy of the urban areas, doesn’t mean this is the ‘end’.

[driftless2]

Romney got two million less votes than McCain. What can we surmise from that info. Hmmmm. Who was McCain’s running mate? Could that have been a factor? hmmmmm. The fact is why I gladly voted for Romney over Obama, I eagerly voted for McCain because Palin was on the ticket. I love Ryan as well, but I have to think Palin stirred the emotions of Pubbies like no one since Reagan. I’ve got to believe she was the reason McCain outpolled Romney.

[griswold3]

“This is right out of the Ted Kennedy/Saul Alinsky playbook.”

Listening to all the noise about what issues the Republicans need to address reminds me of Saul’s quote...
‘It’s never about the issues, it’s about power and control.’
Too many Americans want more free stuff instead of Freedom.

[zt1053]

No won is pointing that. Fewer people voted in this election. The undecided apparently stayed home.

[umgud]

This may be true, but the demographics will eventually overcome us.

[cgbg]

Registration of young Republican voters is important—I agree with that.

The young people have the most to lose in a big-government, no-growth, nanny-state world. So for those who “get it”, why wouldn’t they register and vote.

Just a thought—but we may a “Chief Justice” problem.

You see, the Republican Chief Justice sold young people down the river by requiring them to purchase health insurance they don’t want. He chose to enslave them, pure and simple.

Why would a young person vote if they believed that future Republicans or Democrats would just get them more of the same?

[ConservativeStatement]

I overheard a conversation days after the uprising in Egypt where a person said America would improve “like Egypt” only when the old died and the young here took over. And this person was in her 40s or 50s.

High divorce rates that smash the family structure, pop culture, the media and pinko teachers are reasons why we have a dumbing down of society and a greedy and dependent mentality. It doesn't bode well for the future and I am generally not a fatalist but when people gets their “news” from Whoopi Goldberg and Jon Stewart, we are in a major crisis.

[rottndog]

Palin.But the sad truth is that neither Reagan nor Palin would have a prayer today.The demographics and the mores *are* shifting and they’re shifting *fast*.

If this is true, why did Republicans maintain a strong majority in the House?

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Our own companies have caused this.

BRING BACK AMERICAN JOBS.

Think. America has been shedding jobs for almost 30 years now.

Everywhere. But most concerning, increasingly to China.

Nobody talks about it. We are building a huge, dangerous enemy and bankrupting our nation at the same time.

WHILE LOSING VOTES.

[TurboZamboni]

the 50 top most populated cities represent only 19% of the votes.

[Free Vulcan]

Damn straight. We are right where we were in 2010. Nothing has changed. We are closer to the abyss for sure, but we can try to blunt that in the 2014 mid-terms.

[ilgipper]

It is not one or the other...there is a demographic change. We also have to get our side to the polls. You are correct in that the difference here could easily have been getting our vote out.

Either way, the demographic change has caused us to just barely scrape by when we do win. 2000 was a popular vote loss, and 2004 was too close considering that we pretty much peaked our GOTV in that cycle. The big difference is that the left now has their machine in place in every swing state to get all these groups to the polls. It is baked in now every presidential cycle.

[cripplecreek]

The WWII. Korean and Vietnam Vet's and like minded family members are being replaced by the Beyonce's and J-Zee hipsters that are all about cool and not their education and what they bring to our nation rather than give-me's...

It can be overcome if we have what it takes to seize control of education and culture.

I was raised in a far more liberal age than my grandfather yet have settled in ideologically aligned with where he was. (certainly more so than my liberal aunts and uncles) I went to a public school but my teachers were from the old days and were there because they loved teaching. I grew up with my grandparents, great grandparents and many aunts and uncles nearby and my parents paid attention to what I watched on TV and who I hung around with.

We've got a great big red college out there and we can use that to seize control of all the education and culture if conservatives put some real effort into it.

[matginzac]

I was pondering this question also and what I come up with is locality...that a state that goes blue nationally can still send conservatives to congress in the majority. My state of VA for instance went blue for prez/senate because of the govt Assholes in Fairfax county, Loudon county, and Fauquier county. Most of the rest of VA is red, red, red so most of our congresscritters, a majority, are conservative...
That’s how the House stays red...

[Qbert]

"Romney got two million less votes than McCain. What can we surmise from that info. Hmmmm. Who was McCain’s running mate? Could that have been a factor? hmmmmm. The fact is why I gladly voted for Romney over Obama, I eagerly voted for McCain because Palin was on the ticket. I love Ryan as well, but I have to think Palin stirred the emotions of Pubbies like no one since Reagan. I’ve got to believe she was the reason McCain outpolled Romney."

Yep. I remember watching Newt on the RNC floor in Minnesota in 2008 after Palin spoke- he said something to the effect that there was a feeling in that room that had been missing since 1980.

Ryan's a good man, but yeah, you either feel it or you don't.