Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Strategerist

Now wait a second Romney won Independents in Ohio by double digits.

Something Bush never did.

Clearly he maxed out on I’s he needed the stay at home conservatives that just like you said were 3.2% int the Bible Belt and 11.6% outside.


60 posted on 12/27/2012 5:20:09 AM PST by NeoCaveman (SMOD 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]


To: NeoCaveman

My point is, if there were a bunch of “stay at home conservatives” who didn’t vote because Romney wasn’t conservative enough, then why did Romney lose so many fewer votes in the Bible Belt than the rest of the country, compared to Bush?


64 posted on 12/27/2012 5:37:13 AM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: NeoCaveman

That is, wouldn’t you think there would be a lot more “stay at home conservatives” in Arkansas than in Oregon?

Romney did 4% better than Bush in Arkansas (even accounting for population growth) but 11% worse than Bush in Oregon.


65 posted on 12/27/2012 5:40:50 AM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: NeoCaveman

I shouldn’t have to spell this out (but unfortunately I do) but the drop in Republican votes from 2004 to 2012 isn’t a direct measurement of how many true conservatives “stayed home” - that’s a delusional fantasy.

The OVERWHELMING majority of that drop are people that voted for Bush in 2004, but Obama in 2012.

Secondarily, it’s people that voted for Bush in 2004, and died in the last 8 years.

Tertiary, it’s new voters under the age of 26 added since 2004, the vast majority of whom vote for Obama, of course.


66 posted on 12/27/2012 5:46:49 AM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson