Posted on 11/07/2012 8:14:26 PM PST by SeekAndFind
I just did a quick lookup of the Obama vs McCain popular vote as compared to the Obama vs Romney Popular vote and here is what I see:
Election 2008
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008
2008: Obama: 69,456,897 McCain: 59,934,814
TOTAL VOTES CAST: 129,391,711
Obama Victory Margin: 52.9% to 45.7% (9,522,083 votes)
Obama: 365 EV McCain: 173 EV
_______________________
Election 2012
Source:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2012-election-results
2012: Obama: 60,652,149 Romney: 57,810,390
TOTAL VOTES CAST: 118,462,539 (2,841,759 votes)
Obama Victory Margin: 51.2% to 48.8%
Assuming Obama takes Florida (which as of this writing is still uncalled)...
Obama: 332 EV Romney: 206 EV
___________________
What I find interesting are the following:
1) There were more people who voted in 2008 compared to 2012.
2) McCain got MORE votes in 2008 than Romney in 2012. In fact, McCain got 2,124,424 MORE VOTES than Romney !!
QUESTION : WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE 2,124,424 McCAIN VOTES IN 2012?
3) Obama LOST OVER 8,804,748 Votes in 2012 compared to 2008!!
QUESTION: What happened to those 8,804,748 voters? Did they stay home?
I can only conclude the following, based on the above observations:
* There was LESS ENTHUSIASM by Americans to vote in 2012 than in 2008.
* Contrary to what we were led to believe by the GOP and what some FReepers claim they saw on the ground in their state, REPUBLICANS WERE NOT ENTHUSIASTIC TO VOTE THIS YEAR. In fact, I can see at least 2 Million of them staying home this year compared to 2008 based on the above numbers.
So much for the huge Get Out the Vote Effort, the huge, sellout crowds in Red Rocks Colorado and in Ohio...
* Even though Obama lost over 8 Million votes this year, most of those voters DID NOT switch to Romney, preferring to stay home ( I suspect many of these would be the disappointed youth of 2008 and the socially conservative blacks of 2008. The former still can't find good jobs and the latter couldn't vote for a gay marriage supporting candidate. However, they still could not vote for Romney. So, they stayed home ).
Also, I cannot help but conclude that a huge proportion of the GOP base STAYED HOME in 2012. Otherwise, where were the over 2 million votes that went to McCain in 2008?
This was a self-inflicted loss on the part of the Republicans.
https://www.google.com/elections/ed/us/results
Hundreds of thousands or millions of votes to come in soon?
Just reporting what I heard.
Both said that they weren't voting for Obama or Romney. That they were not going to vote for President.
RE: Good questions. I’ll cover what I think in my article, which I’ll offer to AT or PP next week.
Please do so Mr. Hatter. AT and PP are very widely read by conservatives and is often quoted by Limbaugh, Hannity and Mark Levin.
I’d really like to understand the reason for this disturbing “boycott” (for want of a better word) myself.
“The end result is — WE GET SOMETHING VERY BAD.”
That is exactly what happened. The republicrats are called the stupid party for a reason. Half a cup full of lite conservatism is better than a full cup of marxist tyranny but a lot of morons can’t see the difference.
Yes. It’s good to see the numbers laid out like that. It’s not as if Obama gained traction and beat out Romney. Obama lost a lot of his base. But so did Romney. They just stayed home.
The only thing I’m not sure of is who it was that decided to stay home. Values voters? Paulbots? Evangelicals? I suspect that Evangelicals were probably the largest contingent who simply refused to vote for Romney, but it would be interesting to get at least an approximate count.
In any case, Romney was a lousy candidate, and the figures prove it.
How many fewer people voted in the storm-hit areas? If there wasn’t a fall-off of more than 3 or 4 million votes cast in those states, I suspect some fraud that took away Romney votes instead of what we are most often concerned about — adding democrat votes. I’m not a conspiracist, but the way things are going in this country, and with a thug as the attorney general, I am legitimately concerned that there was some of that.
It would be interesting to research obituaries since November 2008, because according to the pundits the Republican Party only appeals to old white guys. A high mortality rate of that demographic might explain the lower Republican voting numbers in 2012. Obviously the demographics of the other party are multiplying at record numbers. It’s just simple math that says it will get more difficult each election as the profile of one party decreases and the profile of the other party increases.
The GOTV in Colorado was NOT impressive, though I DID get harrassed by 500 robo-calls. Robocalling is simply stupid. It will net you 100,000 votes nationally, max. Hardly anyone walked precincts here, and while I did not see very many Obama signs compared to 2008, McCain/PALIN DEFINITELY had more signs in 2008 than Romney in 2912.
A FReeper named Strategerist has an answer to the question of why McCain had more votes than Romney. You might want to consider his observation.
See Post #28 here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2956819/posts?page=26#26
He says:
*****
There are MANY STATES with SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS OF UNCOUNTED VOTES.
10% are still out in Ohio. 14% are still not counted in New York. And that is just states I’ve looked at.
That’s almost all the discrepancy just based on that.
What would the numbers have been like if Sandy wasn’t around...how many people didn’t vote because of Sandy?
A FReeper named Strategerist has an answer to the question of why McCain had more votes than Romney. You might want to consider his observation.
See Post #28 here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2956819/posts?page=26#26
He says:
*****
There are MANY STATES with SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS OF UNCOUNTED VOTES.
10% are still out in Ohio. 14% are still not counted in New York. And that is just states I’ve looked at.
That’s almost all the discrepancy just based on that.
Nonsense. Before writing any article, I would wait until all the ballots cast have been counted. There are millions of votes to be added to these totals. Once they are in you can analyze them state by state. Romney will surpass McCain in total votes.
Your post: “Can you say ‘Fraud’?”
With a keystroke Ben Bernanke can create billions of dollars.
With a keystroke, entire republican-dominated precincts’ votes can be wiped out. Reduces both dem and pub votes, but more pubs than dems. Turnout appears to be lighter.
A few election cycles back, Shelby County TN (includes Memphis) supposedly lost some early voting results in precincts in the eastern (republican) part of the county. Funny, they could not get them back. Oh well.
An electronic voting system can be hacked and a simple program installed to add dem votes in the total and reduce pub votes — add one dem every three, reduce 1 pub every 10.
The possibilities are endless.
RE: What would the numbers have been like if Sandy wasn’t around...how many people didn’t vote because of Sandy?
Sandy could have affected only the following states:
VA, CT, FL, NY, NJ and maybe parts of PA ( The Western part, which includes Philly which would have depressed turnout ).
Of the above, only VA, PA and FL are of concern to us as the rest are blue states anyway. Sandy would have been advantageous to the GOP in PA.
As for OH, IA, WI and CO, Sandy was not even a factor, but even then, Romney did not win any of these.
Only 69% of CA has reported. Millions will come from CA alone with 9 million reported already.
It would be the Mormon half that some (maybe a million at most) would balk at. Catholicism would be a problem only for a tiny sliver of the Evangelicals. The other part is that while many Evangelicals were willing to vote for Mitt and did, their enthusiasm may have been dampened, so that they weren't so excited about actually WORKING for the ticket. ---An evangelical since I was 5 years old (except for two stupid years in college when I was a hard leftist and a confused agnostic)
“Old white guys” dying is more than offset by the fact that conservatives have had more childen than liberals for how many decades now? At least since the killing of the unborn became a “right” in 1973. It’s fact. So many liberals have their children killed in the womb. Other liberals can’t have babies (except artificially inseminated) because they have “sex” with members of their own sex.
Hurricane Sandy could have affected only the following states:
VA, CT, FL, NY, NJ, DE, MD, DC and maybe parts of PA ( The Western part, which includes Philly which would have depressed turnout ).
Of the above, only VA, PA and FL are of concern to us as the rest are blue states anyway. Sandy would have been advantageous to the GOP in PA.
As for OH, IA, WI and CO, Sandy was not even a factor, but even then, Romney did not win any of these.
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.