Posted on 09/26/2012 6:02:01 AM PDT by NoobRep
Here are the CBS/New York Times internals. And here's the con the CBS/NYTs is attempting to pull:
Florida:
In 2004 the vote was R+4.
In 2008 the vote was D+3
CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9.
Ohio:
In 2004 the vote was R+5
In 2008 the vote was D+8
CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9
Pennsylvania:
In 2010 the vote was D+3
In 2008 the vote was D+7
CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9.
-
Again, why won't the media report the dramatic news that Democrats are expected to turnout in record numbers against Republicans?
Because the media doesn't believe it.
And yet, that's exactly what media polls claim will happen.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Good! That’ll give all the lazy ones (and we all know there are a whole lotta those) an excuse to stay home!
And this time it’s on Wednesday anyway!!!!
Look here, I can draw those things up on my computer and print them out in any combination you want ~ and without going to all the expense and bother of calling people!!
Due to opening our demographic floodgates of self destruction and the crazy bent of youth today after we conceded academia to the Left I have no doubt that we likely have more Democrats than at any time since the New Deal but these poll samplings are unrealistic
The vote will be between 2008 and 2010
and it better be nearer to 2010
2010 was a 60-62 percent white turnout for the GOP
that is the mine
those are the votes
lets get digging
Fortunately that is offset by enthusiasm to vote Obama out of office. Remember, this is a silent majority. With the nasty political climate we are in, not many people are going to brag in the workplace or with their neighbors how they are going to vote against Obama. Like in 2010, they are just going to keep their mouths shut and speak at the voting booth.
Are there actually literate people in VA who consider voting for the worst POTUS ever?
Is "eye candy" the priority of VA voters?
I actually do hear people at work say they are going to vote “for Romney” or “against Obama” funny thing is they are the same people that were giddy about voting for Obama last time. I take that as a good sign. You are right that most are not talking about it, even those I know will vote, and will vote against Obama.
I was called last night and asked if I was willing to do a survey that would only take about 10 minutes of my time. It was a short 10 minutes, as soon as they found out I am not voting for Obama they were finished talking to me.
Okay, I must be slow, so answer this for me. You have 39% for D and 19% for R in 2008, for example, so what were the rest? Were fully 52% of absentee requests in 2008 from Indies, or am I completely misunderstanding this?
Okay, I must be slow, so answer this for me. You have 39% for D and 19% for R in 2008, for example, so what were the rest? Were fully 52% of absentee requests in 2008 from Indies, or am I completely misunderstanding this?
had that very same call last night! i said Romney, and that was that. last week, i had an automated survey, and since they gave Obama as the first choice in their question i figured it for an obama poll. So then i figured ok, i am going to screw with them. They asked who i was voting for, i said Romney. They asked who i voted for last time, i said Obama. They asked what party i most closely identified with, i said DEM. Then for statistical purposes they wanted to know race, i said BLACK then they asked if i had a UNION affiliation, i said oh yea. and then if i’d held a union ofc so i said yeah, i was a shop steward. There were a ton of questions about whether the union was talking to me about the election or whether i had talked to other union members about the election. i answered no to all of those. BTW, i am a middleaged white woman who is registered and routinely votes republican. and i am a lawyer, who has never belonged to a union. I thought it was very interesting the LENGTHY questions as to demographics, far more than any given to substance.
i believe this too. Do you know anyone who previously voted for mccain but NOW, after the debacle of the past 4 years, is going to vote for Obama? Upon WHAT, logically, can they base this fallacy that there’s some incredible urge for Dems to get out and vote, more so than 2008, such that 2012 is going to be an historic dem turnout? now it MAY be an historic dem FRAUD effort, THAT i could see.
I can only speak for where I live. Romney will get 75% of the white vote and 0% of the black vote and the city will likely go close to 50/50. Northern Virginia and Virginia Beach have more limosine liberals and “swing” voters.
Obama NEVER lived in a Black neighborhood. LOL!
In Ohio we do not register by party. We are assigned party by the primary in which we chose to vote. Chose to vote in a GOP primary then you are GOP, for example. At least half of General Election voters do not vote in primaries, plus some chose to vote "issues only" in our primaries too. So it would not be altogether unreasonable for 52% to be Unaffiliated (while most of them probably do lean right or left, they just do not vote in a primary)
Also Democrats had a huge turn out lead in "early voting/absentee" last time. They will not have that this time.
“The elections are won on turnout ~ not by converting the other side to vote for your guy.”
Does that work in states like Vermont, California, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts? Or even Utah or Oklahoma?
If not, why not?
“2010 was a 60-62 percent white turnout for the GOP
that is the mine
those are the votes
lets get digging”
Good observation.
The problem is that with each successive election, from now to forever, the Republicans are going to have to win an ever-increasing share of “the white vote” just to stay afloat.
A difficult proposition, there are only so many votes to be won.
This is due to changing demographics that are (at least right now) all-but unstoppable.
Nevertheless, you’re right about diggin’ in the mine!
The last Presidential race in 2008 had 69 million Democrats show up and 59 million Republicans. There are at least 35,000,000 Republicans in that mass of 90,000,000 nonvoting adults.
You get to them with intense campaigning early to get registered, and then to practice their vote in a party primary or caucus.
Guess we missed that train ~ better luck next time.
In 2008 the Democrats reported they'd nearly exhausted the number of nonregistered Democrats and this time they wouldn't actually have any jump in the number of registered Democrats since they're already registered.
Casual little statement eh! They're prepared for the election and know they can lose millions and millions of no shows and still win.
The Republicans have an achilles heel though. We have about 17 million Evangelicals (according to Ralph Reed) who are picky when it comes to voting. George H.W. Bush lied to them so they didn't show up and he lost. They don't vote for Obama. Numbers of them won't vote for Romney. At the moment nobody knows what they'll do this election but the Republicans made no effort to supplement their numbers with a massive voter registration campaign and adroit use of the primaries to hook the new voters ~ quite the contrary. Feb-May were wasted.
Kvetching about the polls is no substitute for pre-preparation for the election. You have to find a good candidate people will like and respect. You register as many new Republican voters as you can. You don't ever PO the Evangelical voters either. Then you go out; do your best in getting folks to the polls; and voila, Ronald Reagan wins ~ and even George W. Bush can win.
Because of the mistakes we have entirely too many who think the only message we have in this campaign is Anybody But Obamugabe ~ which is just so wrong. It doesn't have to be this way.
mccain got several million fewer votes than george w. bush. there’s a reason for that ~ is romney, a leftist, more acceptable than the manchurian candidate?
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.