Posted on 11/22/2012 5:38:02 PM PST by Steelfish
November 22, 2012 The GOP Turnout Myth To win future elections, Republicans will need more than better get-out-the-vote software. By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL
To win the next presidential race, the GOP will have to understand what went wrong in 2012. To do that, they've got to come to grips with what did, and did not, happen with turnout.
Even as Republicans have engaged in some agonizing over their candidate and agenda, many have sought comfort in the notion that a big part of the loss came down to simple mechanics. President Obama had a stunning Election Day operation, which turned out his base. Mitt Romney's shop, by contrast, failed to get people to the polls. That explanation is soothing because it suggests that, in the future, all the GOP needs is a slicker piece of get-out-the-vote software.
It's also broadly wrong.
The turnout myth comes from a statistic that has been endlessly repeated: Mitt Romney got fewer votes than John McCain in 2008. This isn't quite true (Mr. Romney this week eked past the McCain totals), and in any event it is somewhat irrelevant. The Romney vote count reflects a nationwide voter turnout that was down nearly five percentage points from 2008. What matters is how the GOP did in the battleground states.
And there? Mr. Romney beat Mr. McCain's numbers in every single battleground, save Ohio. In some cases, his improvement was significant. In Virginia, 65,000 more votes than in 2008. In Florida, 117,000 more votes. In Colorado, 52,000. In Wisconsin, 146,000. Moreover, in key states like Florida, North Carolina, Colorado and Virginia, Mr. Romney turned out even more voters than George W. Bush did in his successful re-election in 2004.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
We already know what went wrong. The media and Obama convinced the youth, women, and minorities that the GOP hates them .... and they fell for it. Other wrongs ... voter fraud, Romney not calling out Obama on his lie about ending the Iraq war, the media ignoring the Libya incident ... among other things.
The GOP had another problem. Akin’s “legitimate rape” comment and “Rev.” Mourdock taking it upon himself to preach on God’s will did nothing to help with another demographic group.
That was a great summary. Of course it was the “single” woman. Married women went for Romney
Now about what Obama's peeps did ~ apparently very little. They had 69 million voters in 2008 ~ and they proceeded to lose about 10% of them in this election!
THAT IS A HUGE NUMBER!
Although a major loss like that wasn't a surprise to Conservative Republicans, the political model believed by the GOP-e simply couldn't deal with it.
Let me remind folks that Conservative Republicans told the GOP-e that it was time for a Conservative to run ~ not the hapless Mitt Romney whose performance in primaries and caucuses, and public standing polls hadn't improved in the 7 years overwhich he'd been campaigning.
It was time for a change, not more of the same, and with the Democrats getting ready to go belly-up, we needed someone who would secure our political positions throughout the Constitutional offices.
We weren't listened to; GOP-e gained an iron grip on the campaign fund sources; and the party flamed out ~ Mitt not only lost (with his vote totals not keeping up with simple population growth since McCain's run) he took down 23 senate seats!
In the swing states Romney's vote total ALREADY beats McCain even with growth in the voting age population accounted for. And many swing states don't have final totals yet.
23 senate seats? Huh? Akin and Mourdock took themselves down, and in most states where Republicans lost senate seats Romney outperformed the Republican senate candidate.
Wednesday, 07 Nov 2012
Evangelical voters reached a record high in Tuesday’s election, with 78 percent of white evangelicals supporting Republican Mitt Romney, a national survey has found.
The survey of 800 voters commissioned by the Faith and Freedom Coalition found that a record 27 percent of those who voted in the presidential election were evangelicals.
Romney’s 78 percent showing among white evangelicals was 10 points higher than Arizona Sen. John McCain’s in 2008.
“Evangelicals turned out in record numbers and voted as heavily for Mitt Romney yesterday as they did for George W. Bush in 2004,” said Ralph Reed, chairman of TK-based Faith and Freedom Coalition.
http://www.newsmax.com/US/romney-evangelical-vote-obama/2012/11/07/id/463268
The biggest chunk of decline was on Obama's side of the equation ~ not on the Republican side.
Obama had 69 million votes in 2008. 10% of those votes disappeared in 2012. McCain had 59 million votes in 2008. Republican turnout in 2010 is consistent with that turnout ~ except it doesn't fully account for population growth ~ and if you have data to the contrary, let's see the numbers!
Remember, the Democrats votes are coming from a hard won storehouse of Democrat voters, and the Republican votes are coming from a similarly hard won storeouse of Republican voters. There really aren't very many cross-overs in this.
Now about whether or not Romney was responsible for losing all those open or contested Senate seats ~ of course he was ~ much as if he'd be credited with coat-tails if they were won!
His supporters need to learn to take their lumps ~ this dude is not getting a third chance!
THe biggest problem the GOP had in 2012 was Barack Obama - black, young, and cool - that and the ‘rats super GOTV machine about maxed the vote of the young and minorities who’ve been voting for Democrats for years - but in much lower numbers - their turnouts will drop significantly when ‘rats return to running another old white guy, or even white gal, or maybe even minority, since the magic of underdog voting for the first time will be gone.......
Yes, Akin and Mourdock cost us at least two senate seats,
perhaps more. We all know that if Democrats had made
those remarks, it would have been barely mentioned if at all by the MSM. But it was conservatives that said it and we know the results. Some basic training for all Republicans running for office is absolutely necessary.
To start each candidate should read Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.”
Obama convinced enough democrats to vote for him and Romney convinced enough republicans to stay home.
“The Republican Party made an agreement 30 years ago with the Democrat Party NOT to ensure voting integrity and NOT to pursue suspected vote fraud.”
http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2012/11/why-gop-wont-challenge-vote-fraud.html
“PolitiJim writes for Gulag Bound, November 13, 2012, that during the weekly True the Vote webcast, Catherine Engelbrecht related a meeting she had with Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), asking what the GOP would do about voter integrity. The answer?
Nothing. They aren’t legally able to.”
“Since 1982, that Consent Decree has been renewed every year by the original judge, Carter appointee District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise, now 88 years old. Long retired, Debevoise comes backyearly for the sole purpose of renewing his 1982 order for another year.”
In making these 2008 vs. 2012 comparisons, what gets me is that McCain had just about EVERYTHING going against him... an electorate absolutely sick of Bush and the GOP brand, a massive virtually-unprecedented economic collapse, and the tide-of-history wave promoting the first black president, further imprinted by the media as the epitome of ‘coolness.’
Romney, by comparison, actually had many things going for him; so much ammo to use... a wretched economy, high unemployment, Obama’s bowing-to-enemies foreign policy, outrageous scandals involving government malfeasance (Solyndra, etc.) or a hundred murdered Mexicans (Fast and Furious), the US losing its triple-A rating, etc., etc.,
I mean, good grief! Romney had so many more advantages! Yet to come out with either less or virtually the same number of votes as McCain?
Here’s where the GOP went wrong - they pushed a lacluster candidate like Romney using one of the stupidest approaches ever - “He’s electable”. Clearly, he wasn’t.
There were many excellent choices early in the campaign but, too many Republicans voted for Romney (because “he’s electable”), instead of the candidate that they REALLY wanted to support.
So, since Romney was “so electable”, why isn’t he president-elect Romney today?
Hard to believe that the Romney crowd thinks that comparing 2008, when it was impossible for the GOP to win, to 2012, when it was impossible for the GOP not to win, makes any sense or carries a lot of weight.
A real candidate would have swept up the nation and soundly defeated the Carter the 2nd disaster called Obama.
Romney has always failed in politics, and his failure to motivate voters was widely predicted.
The article is not propaganda. She clearly states that obama lost 10% of his support. Don’t be such a knee jerk reactionary. She’s also correct that it would not take much in the way of attracting minority votes to win future elections. Why doesn’t the GOP campaign in minority areas in various forms? Just shifting hispanics by 10 percentage points can make a huge difference.
I mean, good grief! Romney had so many more advantages! Yet to come out with either less or virtually the same number of votes as McCain?
Exactly, and it worries me tremendously that the Romney crowd isn't shamed, or embarrassed, or humbled, they are merely marching on, determined to find the next Romney.
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.
