Senate [In-Depth Discussion] United States presidential election: 2012

I'm saying they're trying to exploit whatever they can, and 'questions' about where Obama was born is what they're exploiting. They're highly partisan and completely willing to ignore any facts that are inconvenient on this and anything else, so it doesn't surprise me that they do that here. Racist or not would be a separate thing. Had this been a rumor about Kerry, or Clinton, I think they'd be just as all over it.

 

Here is an interesting commentary on why Romney lost, having followed this election so closely, I know it to be true.

The liberty movement is sucking votes from the GOP at an alarming rate, and it does not dissipate when elections end, watch for Senator Rand Paul to carry that flag in 2016.

 

While that's definitely noteworthy, I don't think that's why Romney lost. The turnout represents, a far bigger problem for Obama than it did for Romney. Romney dropped something like 2 million from McCain's totals, but Obama's numbers dropped 9 million. The low turnout seems to be far more about Obama supporters losing confidence or enthusiasm than any issue with Ron Paul supporters.

It seems a very weak case to suggest that that is why Romney lost. At least based off the numbers we have. I would be interested to see how many ballots were cast without votes for president, but it would strike me as odd that a group that was that active didn't vote for other races and cast ballots, even if they didn't vote for president.

 

I posted this in another thread, but it hints at how hard the Obama campaign worked in the field to address what they knew was going to be a serious enthusiasm problem. I'd like to find out more about how they tested their messaging with volunteers on the fly.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec12/tactics_11-07.html

Romney's field organizations just couldn't keep up, if this report is accurate. The president's campaign basically scoured the battleground states looking for every single individual who could be convinced to go to the polls.

 

I hear that President Obama won by around 2.8 million votes in the popular vote and that over 3 million Republicans didn't vote (3 million that DID vote for McCain). I'm not sure that would have affected the electoral college, but it's disheartening to learn that so many Republicans decided to stay home. Moreover, it surprises me that less Republicans voted for Romney than McCain.

President Obama actually had 10 million fewer votes than in 2008.

 

You might want to hold off on comparing vote totals against 2008 for a few weeks. In 2008, because of absentee ballots, provisional ballots, and so forth, Obama gained about 4 million votes after election day, while McCain gained about 2-3 million votes. This year, particularly with the increase in provisional ballots (due to voter ID laws) and the disruptions caused by Sandy, we could see even more votes added in the next week or two.

It's likely that Romney will be about even with McCain, and Obama will be about 5-6 million short of 2008, when all is said and done.

 

Good point on the absentee ballots, KK. I entirely forgot that factor. Especially with Sandy.

 

It's more likely to be the provisional ballots that make a difference.

For example, in Virginia, if you cast a provisional ballot on election day for lack of ID, you have until noon on Friday to submit a copy of your ID and have your ballot counted. I remember hearing on the radio that New Jersey might not have all of their provisional ballots in until Friday (because of disruptions from Sandy). There are still votes out there to be counted. They just aren't statistically likely to change the outcome at this point.

 

That's true in New Jersey, KK. It will take a little time for all votes to be counted, but I agree there won't be anything that will alter the outcome.

Now, if we run into faithless electors at this point, that's another story.....

Peace,

V-03

 

The resignation of D. Patraeus as CIA director makes for an interesting start to the lame duck season.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57547239/adviser-romney-shellshocked-by-loss/?tag=socsh]Adviser[/url]: Romney "shellshocked" by loss

The more I read the more schadenfruede I have for this whole thing. From the fireworks display to the transition website that went live to the campaign staff that had their campaign credit cards canceled later that night. This whole thing is just delicious. I'm having trouble figuring out which is just delusion and which was them being certain of victory. Either way it's great that he lost and even greater still that this might finally be the stake in Karl Rove's shriveled little heart.

Problem 2 is what makes me laugh the most:

So Republicans were skewing their own polls. That's just so amazingly funny that you couldn't make it up. Anyway, I feel bad for the poor rubes that they convinced were genuinely going to see the end of Obama. Those people were lied to in this entire campaign and the even sadder aspect is that they're going to continue listening to the conservative media that deceived them.

Also: http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/11/09/bush_had_more_mormon_support_than_romney.html]Link[/url]

The cherry on top. Sure, it's 2% but that's pretty sad.

 

I'd prefer if humanity became intellectually developed enough to completely decouple religious belief from political belief, but at least that's a step in the right direction.

 

What's interesting about this is that Obama actually did much worse in Ohio and Pennsylvania than I expected... but otherwise, Democratis met or exceeded expectations in the blue and swing states.

It's also interesting how Mississipi and Alaska and Idaho have become slightly more pro-Obama... while Indiana has really fallen away.

North Carolina was very close, it will definitely be a swing state again in 2016.

Again, the most Democratic states are the Northeast, Hawaii, California, and Illinois.
Again, the most Republican states are Mormon country, Appalachia, the Great Plains, and Alabama and Louisiana (the only ones in the Deep South now with over a 16-point margin).

 

Look at the huge gap between Romney's narrowest win, North Carolina at +2.2, and the next largest one, Georgia at +8. Really interesting how there aren't any other states in between, despite the pretty graduate Obama gains, starting from +0.6 in FL, to 1.9 in OH, and so on. We're seeing a dwindling number of "lean Republican" states, and a growing number of "lean Democratic" ones.

 

More interesting stuff...

Everyone has been talking about the Hispanic vote going over 70% to Obama. But remember, Asian immigrants are coming in more than Hispanic immigrants now. Who won Asian-American citizens? Obama, by 76%, even more than he won the Hispanic vote.


Putting aside ethnicity, and this is really interesting... Romney and Obama were tied 49%-49% among the "straight" vote. Gays/Lesbians overwhelmingly voted for Obama (76%), and turned out in record numbers (5% of all 2012 voters identified as gay/lesbian). If Romney had just a slight edge with the gay/lesbian demographic alone, he would have at least won the popular vote. Perhaps the EV vote too.
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president


Also, the number of voters under the age of 30 (19% of all 2012 voters) outnumbered the number of voters over the age of 65 (16% of all 2012 voters)! They went up from 2008, and backed Obama by 60%. Young voters are now more politically active and important than senior citizen voters, which turns political "common sense" upside-down.


How did the Republicans hang on to the house? It turns out that Democrats actually won the House "popular" vote. Half-a-million more Americans voted for Democratic House candidates than voter for Republican House candidates in this election.


Lastly, and this is weird, but Romney actually did worse with Mormons than Bush did in 2004.

 

yeah that house popular vote thing is due to the unprecedented levels of gerrymander republican-controlled state assemblies have indulged in since 2010.

peep pennsylvania for a particularly egregious example

as to romney and mormons - haha he is so pathetically uncharismatic even mormons cant love him. who thought it was a good idea to make this man a politician? oh, that's right: mommy and daddy

 

I think gerrymandering is the only thing keeping the Republican Party from being at its weakest point since 1965. It isn't just that the congressional numbers are weak, but also that a majority of the country is just plain over Republican ideas for the time being, such as they are. In 1965, the Democrats were poised to be the majority for a long time to come, but infighting over Vietnam and the repercussions of the civil rights movement weakened it to the point that the party got crushed in 1972 and eventually overpowered on a regular basis at the presidential level. I feel confident in predicting that we're not going to be split over another war in the near future. Immigration could do it, perhaps. I don't see the gay rights movement causing genuine splintering, mostly because its fast becoming accepted everywhere outside the South.

Immigration, though: that could be a major challenge for Democrats. It could also split apart the GOP at the same time.

 

Yeah, even if you listen to FOX news for even a minute these days, it seems that they've all but accepted that gay marriage (across the US and perhaps eventually on the Federal level) is all but inevitable.

 

it IS inevitable. it's going to happen very soon at the federal level, and it won't matter who is president at the time.

 

I'm sorry,. KW, but you've been proclaiming the death of the GOP for the better part of a decade, to the point that you've made some spectacularly wrong predictions about them.

A party that is on its way out doesn't gain 60+ seats in an election, like they did in 2010. They don't get 48+% of the popular vote for President like they did this year. You can't wave those two points away by crying "Gerrymandering!"

Romney lost by about the same margin that Kerry lost by in 2004. Was that the death of the Democratic party? Remember, they'd just had about 6 years of continuous electoral losses at that time, too, but they were able to come back in 2006 and take back both houses of Congress, and then the Presidency in 2008. The Republicans are actually in a stronger position now than the Democrats were then (after all, the Democrats didn't control either house of Congress in 2004).

If you think the country was sick of Bush after 8 years, how do you think they're going to feel about Obama after 8 years? It's not as though he encouraged massive new amounts of turnout for him. Turnout was depressed across the board. As things stand now, it looks like Romney will have gotten about the same number of votes that McCain did in 2008 (even with a large number of Republicans who stayed home), and Obama will fall several million votes short of his 2008 totals. That already suggests a certain amount of weariness with Obama and his policies. While he might get you all hot and tingly, it's clear that he's not doing that for anyone except his base.

Quoting E.J. Dionne, writing on Nov. 4, 2004: "Begin with the facts: A 51-48 percent victory is not a mandate." Obama didn't get a mandate in this election, and without a clear mandate, you can't really support the claim that Republican policies were soundly rejected. We are still a deeply divided country, and if Obama doesn't remember that, he could easily do significant damage to the Democrats (on the order of what you claim Bush did to the Republicans).

 

2010's kind of old news. The Republican gerrymandering problem is what is keeping them alive, I agree with that point. That and old white people (there's still quite a bit of them) however, the demographics are edging them out. I think the fact that the GOP lost 7 seats from the House is an encouraging sign about 2014. I hope to see the Republican leadership destroyed and I will gladly tap dance on their grave when that happens.

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/11/10/3909897/the-stars-editorial-conservatives.html]Link[/url]

I also think that if things don't improve for Kansas it might have a good shot at flipping blue eventually. But we see the results of the teabaggers and their 'limited government'.

 

yeah kk, white guys are weary as heck. the problem is white guys arent getting any younger or more numerous

 

I dont see as changing demographics as a GOP or Conservative problem, after all religion/philosphical philosphy often cross demogrphics. Why would political philophy be any more limited, The GOP/conservative problem is an inability to take practical mesures to temper their philosphy.

not helped by the GOP's continuing to use Nixon's "Southern Stratagy" which they should have long ago abandoned. its practice not philophy that harms them.

 

Maybe it's just time for white people to board the ships going to the West. There's nothing left for us here in Middle Earth. Hey, is that the Elvish departure music I'm hearing from LotR all the sudden?

 

No, it's their philosophy. Their racist Birther and welfare rhetoric; their homophobic stance not only on marriage but often on bullying and hate crimes; their misogynistic views of rape; their racist and xenophobic views of immigration, etc. In the end only (wealthy) white men meet their approval.