Posted on 11/09/2012 1:00:50 PM PST by SeekAndFind
AP's already picked through the gruesome national exit polling from Tuesday. I'd like to highlight one additional piece of data that is especially interesting: According to CNN's figures, Mitt Romney actually won white Millenials (18-29 year olds) by seven points, 51-44, despite losing the broader demographic by 23 points. (McCain lost young voters by 35 points in 2008).
Virtually all of Romney's gains within this age bracket came from young whites. He got absolutely demolished by young people of color; losing young Hispanics by 51 points, and young blacks by 83 points. The specific age breakdown of Asian voters isn't available, but Asians broke 3-to-1 for Obama overall, so an approximate extrapolation isn't particularly difficult.
The demographic implications of Tuesday's results are becoming increasingly obvious: Republicans simply cannot win elections without dramatically improving their standing and image among non-whites. If they don’t, they’ll quite literally lose the future.
yes he also won with white women
He actually won the majority of whites in California and New York as well.
RE: yes he also won with white women
Married white women yes. But what about SINGLE White women?
The trend is not our friend:
White voters as % of electorate 1992 - 87%
White voters as % of electorate 2012 - 72%
With non-whites voting 80% plus Dem, and growing at a much faster rate due to births and immigration, the Dems have a big advantage.
I would take issue with the emerging narrative that repubs must get greater minority acceptance. What repubs need to do is increase their share of the white vote to 3/4 like most other groups. That along with keeping their current minority take would ensure victory for quite a few years,
If the repubs cave on immigration reform, demographically, we are doomed.
Stating that reality still seems to offend some.
Never happen within a majority class.
A minority is a clique. They find solace in unity.
A majority thinks it can afford to split and fight with itself.
Why would anybody put any relevance on exit polling after 2004? Remember exit polling showing Kerry winning in a land slide? People lie, sometimes just for the hell of it.
The single white women like to pretend ........
Romney got 61% of the white vote this time. If he had campaigned as a true conservative and had the record to support him, I think he would have captured up to 65%. He would have won the election....
Anyhow, I am aware that there is at least a 1/4 hardcore leftist faction within the white vote. They will never be swayed.
If you think whites can’t vote as a block, think again. I believe that Mississippi and Alabama are close to 40% black/minority, but the top political offices go repub due to voter solidarity. I think that such things will become more commonplace as the demographic reality starts to become more apparent to people. I don’t really think this is a good thing. People should vote based on merit of candidate only, but since the dems are causing this to happen, future race-block voting will become increasingly more attractive to white voters as well.
“According to CNN’s figures, Mitt Romney actually won white Millenials (18-29 year olds) by seven points, 51-44, despite losing the broader demographic by 23 points. (McCain lost young voters by 35 points in 2008).”
two things
I don’t think the economy the next four years is going to be any better for young blacks than the last four - which will give the best and brightest in the GOP some opportunity there.
And if all the hoopla about “Hispanics & Evangelicals” and “Hispanics & pro-life Catholics” is correct, then their caucuses (Evagelicals and Catholics) are the ones who need to work on “Hispanic youth”.
a good number to have for California would be unregistered “whites”
They don't care if they're worse off, as long as everyone else is worse off, it's the great equalizer. "Miserable people need everyone else to be miserable, then they're happy."
I never thought Mississippi would be a political role model, but it does illustrate that whites can unify.
Still, there's no reason Republicans can't flip Latino and Asian. It's not like they are on a plantation. These are independent people, integrating into larger society by inter-marrying, education, political office. Most are successful and friendly to us on social issues.
interesting...
Well, you know whites in Miss and Al are toothless, rednecks...that’s meme the msm pushes.. /sarc
Anyhow, you are quite right. We can do better with conservative-leaning hispanics and asians....although, thinking in such terms is kind of stupid..
Hispanics are not a uniform blob...you have Cubans, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Guatemalans...all different sub-groups with differing socio-political tendencies...we should micotarget conservative leaning elements in each. Having a candidate that is fluent in Spanish would definitely help. Advertising in Spanish-language media is a must. Ditto for Asian sub-groups and media outlets.
Dems have been successful in generalizing these groups, we have to divide and conquer as it were. It will take culturally and media savy repubs to pry out our natural allies in these voting groups.
I will posit that a strong conservative message will appeal to a much larger share of these groups. Perhaps, not a majority, but enough combined with increased white vote to make the difference.
I really hate all this race-based, ethnic-based stuff. For now, we have to employ the tools of the left to defeat the left. Later, when the dust settles, we will want to gradually destroy the labels and help these groups self-identify as simply patriotic Americans.
I'm puzzled that the Asian-Americans go so strongly for Obama. I guess that group isn't made up of mostly conservative, very family oriented, over-achieving Americans of Japanese and Chinese ancestry. I'm sure the Asia group contains many more elements now, but the 3 to 1 for Obama is surprising.
“The demographic implications of Tuesday’s results are becoming increasingly obvious: Republicans simply cannot win elections without dramatically improving their standing and image among non-whites. If they don’t, they’ll quite literally lose the future.”
The conundrum here is that if the Pubbies try to “improve their standing and image among non-whites” by changing their overall message (by changing what “conservatism” is supposed to represent), they will
1. Lose the white voters, and
2. No longer have a party that stood for what it stands for today.
That’s the dispiriting reality of the 2012 election.
Just had lunch this afternoon with a friend across the border in New York state. He understands the problems conservatives and Republicans have in New York, where they are simply outnumbered by the leftists. Conservatives just don’t have enough votes to win majorities or influence in either state or federal elections any more. It’s really as simple as that.
As a country, we are tipping in the direction of states like California, Illinois, New York, and Massachusetts. That is, before much longer the voice of conservatism is going to be drowned out by demographics — the exploding Hispanic population, growing numbers of Asians (who on the surface SEEM to act as conservatives, but who in reality voted for Obama in higher numbers than did Hispanics!).
I have no answer for this (at least on the federal level).
Numbers are what they are.
Demographics are what they are. You can’t argue much with them.
I do have ideas as to how conservative Americans can deal with the future, on a state-wise level. But that’s the subject of future postings...
“yes he also won with white women”
I would like to introduce you to a new voting bloc, and a new term for that voting block that in this post, I lay claim to:
“Ladyparts voters”.
Obama won something like 70% of them — the young, female voters whose primary political interests seem in protecting their personal sovereignty over their “lady parts”.
A tip of the hat for Sandra Fluke for leading the way on this one!
“I would take issue with the emerging narrative that repubs must get greater minority acceptance. What repubs need to do is increase their share of the white vote to 3/4 like most other groups. That along with keeping their current minority take would ensure victory for quite a few years,
If the repubs cave on immigration reform, demographically, we are doomed.”
You’re right, of course.
But didn’t Cryin’ John Boehner already say that he’s willin’ to deal on “comprehensive immigration reform”....?
I can see what’s comin’.
Can you?
“I believe that Mississippi and Alabama are close to 40% black/minority, but the top political offices go repub due to voter solidarity. I think that such things will become more commonplace as the demographic reality starts to become more apparent to people. I don’t really think this is a good thing. People should vote based on merit of candidate only, but since the dems are causing this to happen, future race-block voting will become increasingly more attractive to white voters as well.”
Stop and think for a moment about what you’ve written above.
The ONLY reason that Republicans “own the South” in states like Mississippi and Alabama right now is because the Euros have “seen reality” and vote “as a block” to protect their own interests in a racially Balkanized state. Who would be running those states if they did not?
And my next question:
If seeing “ethnic/racial realities” and voting with such realities in mind works for those in the South, pray tell why it wouldn’t work for Euros in the rest of the country?
As the saying goes, you can’t argue with success.
The Euros of the South have wised up, and have learned how to “succeed” in the changing political landscape.
Why shouldn’t the rest of us learn as much?
Of course!
There were tens of thousands of young people at his rallies!
The MSM is pigfaced lies.
Yep. The demonrats wanted tribal voting, and they shall get it.
I see it coming and I don’t like it.
We need time to absorb large groups of new immigrants. It is part of the “Americanization” process. Amnesty, will overwhelm us because the 20 million already in this country illegally will actually translate into 60 million new citizens with in a few years. No country, no matter how open-minded, tolerant, and economically prosperous can absorb such a large group of new immigrants in so short a time, especially one where real unemployment is already at 14.5%.
We must fight this with all our might, even if this is a losing cause.
Republicans won 56% of House Districts and will continue to do that. What we can’t win is Senate seats and the Presidency because Obama has a machine that turns out so many urban voters at such high percentage votes for D’s that they overwhelm all the other congressional districts.
Personally I prefer this status quoa rather than hopping on the amnesty bandwagon for hispanics but that’s just me. Adding 10 million more voters to the D database does not seem to be a way to win national elections especially when the exit polls showed clearly that 3/4 of them were voting for free things rather than on illegal immigrationcrap.
I know what I have written and realize the implications. It doesn’t mean that I happy about it though.
I served proudly in the USMC for many years. I have worked with and have known many great patriotic Americans of all colors, religions, and ethnic backgrounds. We were all green and we believed in America. That is the America I love. We are being forced into a balkanized nation by people who don’t know or care what will be the end result.
It is my sincere hope that we can navigate these turbulent waters in which we are now sailing.
As for people up north, I think many have already figured out what you are saying. However, there is still a very large recalcitrant group who have liberal social leanings and are very much put off by what they perceive as the moralizing of the Republican party. This combined, with an entitlement mentality, is the main reason they vote democrat. They will probably only figure out their reality, when the checks start to bounce and their neighborhoods begin to look like Detroit.
Now, about intermarriage, the asian women find American men quite the bargain ~ and that really POs the asian guys, particularly the ones who think they need a wife to be superior to.
The latinas, as many Freepers can tell you, think of American men as more than a bargain ~ and I think that just POs the cock of the walk guys in their ethnic groups just that much more.
Isn’t it blacks that loot and burn the Korean businesses during riots?
So, as it stands, we can conclude that Romney (and Republicans) don't have a problem with young people, or with women, but the problem is actually confined to the minority population -- exclusively.
The question then is: What should we conclude from that?
Should we recognize that Democrats have won their commanding position among minorities by offering "free stuff"? Should we then conclude that the GOP should compete by offering even more goodies to minorities?
Or should we conclude that the Republican party should be positioned as "The Party Of Opportunity...for all Americans"?
The latter is certainly a valid position, founded on conservative principles.
And we should recognize that the Republican Party does NOT need to gain a majority of the minority vote! A meaningful fraction would suffice.
That is doable. But we need to undertake the missionary work. It will be harder than pandering...but it offers a route to a long-term governing majority.
The party needs to form a task force focussing on this subject alone. It should include successful black conservatives -- both in business, politics and retired military. Our message should reflect their experience and success, appealing to the aspirations of young people like them. It should include experienced, successful advertising, marketing and PR personnel (decidedly NOT "campaign operatives and strategists") who understand branding, positioning and communications.
There is now only one way to go. And it is so apparent that it will probably be overlooked.
it tells us nothing really. AA dont vote for Conservative or Republican AA. Some gop hispanics are popular, I am wondering what percentage of the hispanic vote Cruz got,
Problem is that people in Detroit haven’t figured that out yet. And I suspect they never will. Rationally speaking you’d think that Detroit would have turned red after decades of Democrat mismanagement. It hasn’t. It’s only become more blue. We’ve reached the tipping point - more people who want free fish than fishing poles.
I’m inteested in this: He got absolutely demolished by young people of color; losing young Hispanics by 51 points, and young blacks by 83 points.
So, Mitt got 49% of young latinos and 17% of young black citizens, I’d say that’s good news and something to build on. Yes?
No way spread was only 83 for young black people — more like 93....3% voting for Romney....93% for Obama, and 4% for Bronco Bama.....
No. It means that he got about 24% of young Latinos (say, 75-24) and 17% of young blacks.
The latter would be good news -- if it is true.
“No way spread was only 83 for young black people — more like 93....3% voting for Romney....93% for Obama, and 4% for Bronco Bama.....”
93% of blacks voted for Obama.
71% of Hispanics voted for Obama.
73% of Asians voted for Obama (higher % than Hispanics!).
I don’t blame these groups for voting in [what they perceive to be] their “group best interests”. That’s natural, normal, and it’s NOT going to change much. They inherently understand that that is where political power comes from.
What I cannot understand is why Euros and conservatives cannot perceive this, and why — in the face of empirical evidence again and again and again and again and again (had enough yet?) — they can’t wake up and see that their only pathway towards keeping their fair share of political power in this country will be to begin voting “their group interests”, as well.
Who is credited with that adage that says, “insanity is repeating the same thing over and over again, yet expecting different results each time” ??
Whites that mostly DON’T vote R:
union members
govt employees
SSDI/Medicaid/99ers
Jews
Bump
I’m quoting from the article: “He got absolutely demolished by young people of color; losing young Hispanics by 51 points, and young blacks by 83 points.”
So don’t tell me that “No way spread was only 83 for young black people — more like 93....3% voting for Romney....”
If you’re going to challenge what I said, cite something else besides some crap numbers you made up.
No offense intended. I was making a joke — note the other 4% for Bronco Bama....bad joke.
According to the poll, you mentioned:
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president#exit-polls
Black (aggregate) 93% for Obamao and 7% for Mit, Other not represented (86 point spread). So actually, Mit out performed in the young black category 91 - 8 (yes, 83 point spread) + 1 other/Broncobama vote. :-)
So, I guess that’s something.
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.