Posted on 11/06/2008 5:52:55 AM PST by xzins
COLUMBUS: Ohio's 2008 presidential election was memorable for what it wasn't: controversial, plagued by problems, record-setting, crucial to winning the White House.
After partisan bickering that set the stage for controversy, and the persistent memories of failures in 2004, the 2008 presidential election was extremely quiet in Ohio on Tuesday with few problems reported.
However, despite balmy weather with temperatures in the 70s, turnout looked likely to fall significantly below the 80 percent mark that had been projected. There was a chance it had not even hit the 72 percent mark reached in 2004, which set a record in Ohio for a presidential election. Turnout reports ranged as high as 86 percent in Perry County, while many counties hovered in the 60s and low 70s.
Despite having clinched President Bush's re-election in 2004, Ohio simply played a supporting role in 2008, as Democrat Barack Obama won the presidency with relative ease.
Still, the race for the Ohio's 20 electoral votes was tight. According to unofficial results, Obama won by about 200,400 votes out of 4.5 million cast. Bush had won Ohio by about 118,000 votes out of more than 5.5 million cast four years ago.
The campaigns of both Obama and Republican John McCain campaigns said they were satisfied with how things went across the state.
(Excerpt) Read more at ohio.com ...
You need to ask the people in OHIO, I don’t live there.
15,000 in NC
26,000 in IN
95,000 in FL
153,000 in CO
156,000 in VA
205,000 in OH
Some might have stayed home because they didn’t consider McCain a conservative. I have no problem with principled stands.
Some have suggested here that the SoS’s permitting fraud could have made others think it was hopeless.
I suppose some bought the “it’s all over” line from the media and its pollsters.
If they did, they are idiots. But I rather suspect that voter fraud had a lot more to do with Obama's taking Ohio than conservatives staying home.
Can't someone sue for injunctive relief on her ballot decision? Surely the Obaminoids aren't so firmly in charge that they could just wave away complaints like that.
Conservatives didn’t have anything to vote for. It’s never easy to get people to come out and vote against anything and conservatives are naturally optimistic people who need something positive to vote for.
McCain wasn’t all that different than Obama. Cap and trade? problems with excessive profits? Greedy Wall Street profits? Reign in corporate CEO pay? No drilling in a barren wasteland?
If you can find one conservative economic principle in McCain’s original ideas, that’ll be the first.
People preferred him to Hillary but he ran against Obama and that was the problem.
I think you covered it.
Just look it all up on FR! They took it to the Supreme Court and got screwed!
Now even a flippin’ park bench is an address! http://dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/10/28/ajudgerule.html?sid=101
And this! Elections officials cannot challenge voters on Election Day or reject absentee ballots based solely on discrepancies from verifying new voter registrations, Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner said yesterday in directives to counties.http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/10/23/no_challenge.ART_ART_10-23-08_B1_E3BM90B.html?sid=101
Actually I agree with Rush here, if Hillary had run, many conservatives would have voted for her over McCain
Thoughts?
Looking at all the data, I believe McCain/Palin were going to JUST win it if the economic disaster held off a couple of months. That speaks to Obama’s WEAKNESS more than anything else. The polls cratered dramatically and I think two threads pulled loose from which they could not recover.
1) The collapse itself scared the heck out of everyone, but mainly it was the final nail in the mushy middle/RINO vote.
2) The Bailout portion was the final nail in the conservative turnout.
The object lesson in how both of Bush’s “wings” fell off in the last 3 years.
It really is a miracle McCain did as well as he did, which tells me that without those 2, he possibly was on track to win a close one. He was pulling ahead significantly in key states like OH, FL, VA and NC. It would have been close until the crash/bailout.
What that means now is that all hope isn’t lost, but it won’t be easy. Unfortunately, the GOP often learns the WRONG lessons from events like this. Someone will have to come along that can articulate the positions well enough.
I hope we won’t have to wait 8 years like the Dems did with W, and that if there is a mess for Obama, it comes early on. But pushing back in the house and senate may be just as, if not more, important that 2010. Getting ARTICULATE conservatives is key.
It takes someone special to articulate conservative economic thought in coherent sound bites.
But the numbers were down. A lot fewer voters than even in the last election just 4 years ago.
Considering the amount of fraud in this election, history will show Obama’s presidency will always be questionable. I read somewhere that African Americans were voting 100% in some districts. We know about 200000 in Ohio, and the 100000 voters registered in GA, and then registered in Ohio or Florida. And in Wisconsin, there were many reports of cars with Illinois tags at the polls.
There are so many questions surrounding this election.
How, could he possibly, get so much of the Catholic vote? How, could he possibly get so much of the coal country, (OH, PA, WV) vote? Most important, why did so many stay home when they could have tried to counter this?
There are sad days ahead for our Country. God help us.
Voters in Ohio had to show a valid ID
My question is - did they stay home? Or were their votes not counted? It’s already been shown that Ohio was one of their targets for massive voter fraud. Is it possible that their votes were not even counted?
The timing of the crash/bailout deserves study. Could it have been coincidence? Sure.
However, it was also at a critical part in an election campaign. Could it have been politically expedient to have it announced when it was? Yes, it certainly hurt. And the fact that they were able to hold off that “critical need” for money is evidence that it did NOT have to be announced when it was.
Heck, they’re still trying to get banks to quit sitting on the money they were supposedly desperate to get their hands on.
The margin should make us work hard on new registrations. Rather paying 100 to 150 dollars for this consultants, we need to invest more on the lower level foot soldiers. For example, paying 20 to 25 dollars an hour will be a good incentive for people to be responsible and motivated to work. You pay 10 dollars like moveon.org,it will be ACORN again.
Bottom line, we cannot just depend on radio talk shows and fox news to deliver the election. We need stronger, LOCAL organization.
Could it be because there were no social issues on the ballot and those issues were not emphasized by the McCain campaign?
Yes - and here's why.
Bottom line, we cannot just depend on radio talk shows and fox news to deliver the election. We need stronger, LOCAL organization.
________________________________________________
Agreed. And local organization cannot wait until a moderate candidate selects an exciting running mate. How about a strong conservative from the get go?
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.