Posted on 11/07/2012 8:40:52 AM PST by TigerClaws
You can forget about that. If there is on “lesson” the ‘Pubbies have take from this election, it is that they need to go FURTHER Left. More free stuff! Pander to illegal aliens! etc.
That is true long number...but Romney UNDERPERFORMED McCain who ran a horrifically bad campaign. I wasn’t a big Romney fan, but I even thought he was running a great campaign...and to get less than McCain seems almost impossible.
It isn’t about how conservative you are, it is about how well you articulate you views. Mitt wasn’t bad at it, but we need someone better. For example, Mitt didn’t explain his economic vision well, nor did explain why a lot of the problems er have are Obama’s fault, not Bush’s. I vited fir Mitt, and I’m not even sure what his economic plan was. I was just hoping he’d do what Paul Ryan said.
I think Romney lost for the following combination of reasons, in no particular order:
1. The media has been covering for Obama for four years. When Bush was in office, the MSM was frantic in its search for scandal, even to the point of trying to make a scandal out of Bush’s Thanksgiving turkey photo op, and creating the infamous “Plamegate” out of thin air. With Obama, however, the MSM runs away from potential scandal. All of this is probably worth about 2 percentage points to Obama.
2. The Mormon thing. I think some evangelicals stayed away because they don’t like or trust Mormonism. Many liberals, of course, don’t either, but they weren’t potential Romney voters. This probably cost Romney something like one-fourth of one-percent of his potential vote.
3. Gaffes - Republican gaffes become front-page news, Democratic gaffes do not. The rape and abortion gaffes by Republican senatorial candidates splattered Romney with friendly-fire schrapnel. Biden’s almost-daily gaffes were ignored. The net effect of this probably cost 1 percent or so.
4. The war-on-women. Absurd as it was, it does affect the voting behavior of non-political women, who hear it in the wind, think there might be something to it, and vote accordingly. Another 1-2 points lost for Romney.
5. The Wars. America is war-weary, and even the slightest hint of Republican militarism, e.g., of a “hot” conflict with Iran, will scare away some voters. Take away another one-half percent from Romney.
6. Romney blunders. The 47% comment and one or two others got him a lot of bad press. These unforced errors probably cost him another one-fourth to one-half percent.
7. The “we can’t reject the first black president” syndrome. White guilt about having voted for Obama and then possibly rejecting him probably induced some to vote for Obama despite misgivings. Another one-fourth point lost.
If these factors had not been present, Romney could have overcome the demographic factors that militated against him.
“Less conservatives voted in this election than voted for McCain, do the math!”
I would love nothing more than to believe you. Wonder where we can find the data to back it up. The data (where) would be as helpful as the idea.
How long before it’s realized this is backlash. If the Republican establishment had treated Dr. Paul fairly, instead of marginalizing him, a different scenario may have resulted. “No Paul, no vote”, is the consequence, and the disenfranchised have repudiated the RNC game plan of putting all the eggs in one basket, ignoring the consequences of ignoring the electorate. The stage is set.
122 million ~ at the moment Drudge says 60 mil votes for Obama and 57 mil votes for Romney. That's 117 million ~ VOTES, not POLLING PLACES.
I don't know for certain...just throwing it out there.
The vote turnout in El Paso County.
http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CO/El_Paso/43055/110775/en/summary.html
NO, you need to assume I know what the hell I’m talking about. The state supervisors...the 50 of them....all report early voting totals and election day expectations. A couple days ago, that info led people who track these things every two years, to estimate 138 million voters would cast votes. That total now appears to be about 16 million votes off - depending on how many votes trickle in over next few days. Yes, I know it’s 117 million now plus, but it will end up over 120.
Still, some 14-17 missing votes .....
There are enough of us. Obama lost 10 millions votes from 2008. McCain numbers from 2008 would have beat Obama yesterday. It's not about demographics, it's about the culture...the culture of gov't dependence vs. self-reliance. Of course, we have go out and convert people, yes, including Latinos, to the idea of limmited gov't and self-reliance. But if embracing Latinos means we have to embrace open borders and massive gov't handouts, then forget it.
YEP --
“It’s possible vote fraud could account for some of that, but how do you account for the Democrat losing 9 million votes? “
we need state-by-state data, because the truth is in some very blue states, like New York & New Jersey (the storm) there can be a heck-of-lot of missing Dim votes and Obama still win the state, even if more GOP do show up; and in the end such lost Dim voters do not change the electoral college outcome
one challenge the GOP never seems to even try to tackle in some states, is that there can sometimes be people who are eligible but not registered to vote and of a percantage than is 100 or 200 percent greater than the % GOP POTUS candidates lose by (like New Jersey, when GW lost NJ to Kerry)
the turn out differences need to be looked at state by state, those figures are more significant than the sums they add up to
in some very blue states, low Dim voter turnout could sometimes still not lose the state for Obama
The number of voters is another issue ~ but I bet, as usual, 98% of the votes were reflected in the count on Drudge at 9AM this morning.
I’m so tired of hearing this. Anyone who falls for media bullshit at this stage just needs to be shot.
I’m repeating myself in this thread.
we need the state voter turn out data to look at the total turnout question accurately
in some very blue states, like New York and New Jersey, low Dim turnout was not likely by itself to cost Obama the state
Early voting, no photo ID, register when voting, vouching for others to register without ID or having an ID yourself, being able to apply for multiple absentee ballots mailed to your residence to be used by un-named others to vote by mail from other addresses, voting with computers that leave no hard copy, voting by mail, voting by e-mail, having votes tabulated by computers outside the country and these companies owned by partisian socialist with a stake in US elections. What could possibly go wrong, certainly no one would cheat.
O.K.
I thought the issue you were trying to make was Santorum won El Paso County in the primary so Santorum would have been a better candidate in Colorado, but Romney did not lose the county in the general election;
so what WAS your point
I suppose the point is that Santorum may have been a better a candidate for El Paso County. But like you said, we are just going to have to wait and see what the data will show when it comes out.
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.