Independent Voters 1988-2008

ropercenter ^ | 9/27/2012 | Self

[Signalman]

I posted this the other day. With the moderator's permission, I would like to post this again in order to focus attention on the importance of the independent vote in the upcoming election:

In 1988 Independents voted for GHW Bush +14 over Dukakis. Bush won the election by +7

In 1992 Independents voted for Clinton +6 over GHW Bush. Clinton won the election by +6.

1n 1996 Independents voted for Clinton +7 over Dole. Clinton won the election by +8

In 2000, Independents voted for Bush +2 over Gore. Bush/Gore tied popular vote.

In 2004 Independents voted for Kerry+2 over Bush. Bush won by +3.

In 2008, Independents voted for Obama +8 over McCain. Obama won by +8.

Rasmussen Poll 9/23/2012

Romney is +12 w/independent "unaffiliated" voters.

[scooby321]

Plus 12 and he is getting killed?

[VanDeKoik]

He’s not.

[Elpasser]

Romney/Ryan are going to win. The enthusiasm among Repubs, coupled with the disappointment among Ind’s and Dems, is palpable.

I know several relatives and friends who voted for Obama and now virulently oppose him. I don’t know ANYONE who voted for McCain but has since changed his mind.

Using the 2008 party ID models, particularly after the 2010 “shellacking” and the tanking economy, is flat out absurd.

[Obadiah]

Thanks for posting. In searchable and infamous focus groups sessions of Independents, by people such as Frank Luntz, you can witness Independents who are seemingly incapable of making a decision. I think these people are loathe to attach themselves to any decision that pollsters present to them. While the +12% is likely indicative of where things are, I firmly believe that as the November day of reckoning draws near that you will see Independents and Undecideds break sharply for Romney & Ryan. I think Obama and Axelrod know this.

[LS]

If you have been following my posts on OH absentee voting, you'll know that Zero is in huge trouble here. He is underperforming in absolutely very county, often by 20%

Stats are here: http://tinyurl.com/bvfsb7u

In my analysis, I make three assumptions relevant to this thread: 1) No R will vote for Obama; 2) No D will vote for Romney; and 3) independents will split

You can see the implications of this if there is, indeed, a +2 Indie advantage for Romney, let alone a +12. If it's +12, he would win OH by 10 points.

[STJPII]

While I’m heartened by this, I suspect the Hispanic/AA turnout will exceed the election number for all the above except, 2008.

[Yashcheritsiy]

While I’m heartened by this, I suspect the Hispanic/AA turnout will exceed the election number for all the above except, 2008.

So? Even if we saw a 10% increase over "normal" numbers for the turnout of these groups (i.e. something approximating 2008 levels), a mere 3.9% shift in the white vote negates it completely. And I suspect Romney is going to be the beneficiary of much more than a 3.9% shift in the white vote away from Obama.

[Yashcheritsiy]

Frankly, the way Independents go is, I think, a better indicator than almost anything else. This is because Independents are the most representative slice of America. An "independent" can be anything - left, right, white, black, rich, poor, whatever. The term is just a catch-all to describe someone who isn't a D or an R. Ds and Rs tend to cluster around certain personality/demographic/economic types. Independents may include these as well, but balance it out with everything else.

If Romney's leading with the Is at +12, he's going to smash Obama.

[Nifster]

It is my experience (based on past elections) that ‘undecideds’ tend to not vote at all....they stay home. Now the question is are the so called undecideds truly undecided or just plants?

[taxcontrol]

And this is EXACTLY what the GOP-e look at as the entire picture. Thus, they determine that if the GOP is going to win an election, they must put everything into what appears to be a moderate candidate. The problem with that view is that it does not take into account the number of the base that either stays home or does not vote for their moderate candidate.

The analysis that NEEDs to be done in addition to the “independents”, is an analysis of the base and their enthusiasm to support the candidate.

The ONLY reason McCain received the number of votes that he did was because of Gov Palin on the ticket. But the GOP-e see her and conservatives as a liability not as the motivated base.

[kidd]

Linear regression of your information shows that if Romney is +12 with Independents, he will win by 4%-10%.

With an energized GOP, and a loss of enthusiasm from students, I tend to think it’ll be closer to 10% than 4%.

Anything above 9% is landslide territory.

[bicyclerepair]

So basically we’re at the mercy of those who hold no principles.

How long can a nation survive this?

[kidd]

I don’t believe we’re at the mercy of those who hold no principles.

The GOP has to choose a leader that can convince the squishy middle that conservatism is the only way.

Ronald Reagan did it.

Newt Gingrich could have done it. Herman Cain could have done it. Sarah Palin could do it. Paul Ryan might be able to do it.

Mitt Romney cannot do it, because he embraces the squishy middle. But he’s not the train wreck that is Obama.

Let’s kick Obama out now and fight for a better candidate to replace Romney.

[bicyclerepair]

Thanks Kidd. It’s difficult for me to maintain hope right about now....