Posted on 08/17/2012 7:08:20 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
WASHINGTON — Curtis Napier, a 52-year-old father of two in Lima, Ohio, belongs to a much-discussed group of Americans that is far smaller than is often realized: He is a true swing voter.
He voted for George W. Bush in 2004 and for Barack Obama in 2008. With three months remaining in the campaign between President Obama and Mitt Romney, Mr. Napier said, “I may not just vote for either one of them.”
About one-third of Americans describe themselves as independent voters, creating a widespread impression that a large group of Americans will provide the decisive swing votes in this year’s election. But that impression is misleading, polling experts and political scientists say.
Many self-described independents — close to half, according to surveys — reliably vote for one party or the other. And many true swing voters live in states, like California or Texas, where no analyst doubts the outcome in November.
In spite of clichés about Nascar dads and Walmart moms, the actual share of voters nationally who are up for grabs is probably between just 3 percent and 5 percent in this election, polling experts say. The Obama and Romney campaigns are expected to spend on the order of $2 billion, in part to try to sway this tiny share of the electorate.
“There’s a very small slice of people who are genuinely undecided, but it’s enough to win the presidency,” said Rich Beeson, the political director for Mr. Romney’s campaign.
The share of swing voters may even have declined in recent years, as many voters have become more reliably partisan. A report by the Pew Research Center found that self-identified Democrats are more liberal than in the past and self-identified Republicans are more conservative.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I hang out at an Italian social club in an overwhelming Democrat City. A city employee did a Straw Poll of us. 30-6 Romney. Another told me last night not to tell anybody, but he too is voting for Romney.
If that’s true then the poll margins should be static.
People hold many affiliations that are far stronger than political party, and those affiliations are the prime determinants for which way you will vote, or if you will vote at all.
I don't even think there's a 2% or 3% swing ~ it's more like a get out the vote problem than anything, and time after time political party technicians have told us 'we got out the vote' as the first thing out of their mouths.
There's a reason why we have two major parties that split the electorate (people who vote) rather evenly. There are only rarely reasons for people switching from one party to the other and when that happens we all know it.
What we have in this race is a very real difficulty ~ both parties have bad candidates. Both candidates are the sort of folks who discredit the utility of focusing on getting out the vote ~ one of them thinks you just buy off the top guys and everything will be OK. The other guy thinks he doesn't need troops on the ground ~ so he dismisses them as useless Social Conservatives.
I"m looking at a possible drop in the number of people voting ~ not just a drop in the percentage of the eligible population, but an actual drop from the last couple of elections. These two are simply not popular enough, nor do they care enough, to get out the vote and win.
It's really a toss-up this election. Congress should prepare for an early impeachment no matter who wins.
I’m glad to hear that.
I’ll say this — if Scott Brown can beat back the challenge of Elizabeth Warren, Massachusetts might surprise us and do the unthinkable — go Romney (their ex-governor )!!
My feelings is this -— Scott Brown and Romney rise or fall TOGETHER in Massachusetts. I don’t expect your state to vote Brown for Senator and Obama for President.
The poll margins are ratcheting down as the support for each candidate continues to soften ~ eventually the pollsters will quit tossing out the non responses and everybody may get some surprises.
If this was an off-year (Presidential) Scott Brown would win in a walk.
I saw some pundit says it really isn’t down to swing states but just voters in a handful of counties across those states. I suppose this isn’t all that surprising but it is disturbing.
I’m conservative and don’t consider Romney to be conservative. So, I am not voting for him anymore than I would Obama.
However, I think Romney was VERY shrewd to chose Ryan as his running mate. Romney is not trusted by the conservative base of the GOP, and he was losing them due to apathy with him being the candidate. By picking Ryan, he shored up a great deal of the base...because Ryan is indeed conservative and it excites most of the base to be for the Romney/Ryan ticket than merely against Obama/Biden.
From what I have witnessed here on FR, his strategy is working. The same way picking Palin helped McCain with the base. This pick of Ryan may well be the thing that gets Romney elected.
Now, that being said, and giving credit to a shrewd choice. Personally, I’m still not buying into voting for Romney. The moment he is elected he was lock Ryan into a closet somewhere to keep him quiet. Then Romney will go back to being the liberal he is at heart. However, in the mean time he will do damage to the brand of “conservatism” even though he is not really conservative. The crap he will pull as POTUS will set back conservatism for a long time. It will cost us the loss of seats in congress gained in 2010 and this fall, and then cause us to lose the office of POTUS to Hillary in 2016. IF folks think Obama is evil (which he is) try an Obama that is actually intelligent. That is Hillary - Obama with brains. That is the ultimate legacy a Romney administration will deliver us. A destruction of the “conservative” brand and Hillary as POTUS in 2016....more virulent than Obama - because she is actually smart plus an unrepentant liberal (more so than her hubby was).
I’m hearing from former obama voters that many are NOT voting for obama again and others that just aren’t going to vote at all.
They’re “fed up with the whole thing,” whatever that means.
The left is demoralized over trying to prop up the One. Owebama is this election’s McCain!
The crap he will pull as POTUS will set back conservatism for a long time.
***I agree. CINOs cause more damage to conservatism than democrats do.
I lived in Santa Barbara a few years back. Our conservative congressman did a pretty good job. Along came this republican dude with lots of money, named Huffington. he spent more on this congressional primary race than any other in history. He unseated the congressman. When the time came to vote, I could not pull the lever for this POS and wrote in the former congressman. Straight Republican ticket. Years later, Huffington admitted to being gay, his wife divorced him and started Huffington Post, and do-nothing congressman Huffington basically did more damage to conservatism than any democrat ever could. The seat has been firmly in the hands of a librul ever since. Writing in the conservative republican over that POS was the honorable thing to do.
At least with McCain we could hope for “health problems” and his replacement by Palin. With Romney/Ryan all we can hope for is 2020. Still Romney is a better man than Obama and I’m voting against Obama.
The Clintons are opportunistic crooks on a large scale. UI don’t think that Hillary is the out and out Enemy of the Republic that Obama is.
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.