Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Battleground-State Voters Leaving the Democratic Party
National Journal ^ | December 7, 2011 | Josh Kraushaar

Posted on 12/08/2011 8:30:49 PM PST by neverdem

President Obama and his re-election team have prided themselves on their well-oiled get-out-the-vote effort.  But a new study from the centrist think tank Third Way suggests Democrats are losing ground organizationally in nearly all of the key battleground states in the general election.

The group's analysis found that, in the eight politically-pivotal states that register voters by party, a significant number have left the Democratic party since 2008, with many choosing to register as independents.  Over 825,000 registered Democrats in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina and Pennsylvania have departed the party rolls since President Obama's election in 2008, a much more significant share than the number of Republicans (378,000) who have done the same.  Meanwhile, the number of registered independents has ticked upwards by 254,000.


(RELATED: GOP Candidates to Trump Debate: You're Fired)

"In 2012, Independents are likely to turn out in their largest numbers in 35 years, and President Obama will need those Independent votes even more than he did in 2008, if he hopes to be re-elected," Third Way analysts Lanae Erickson and Michelle Diggles write in the report.

(RELATED: Obama's Oops: President Confuses Texas and Kansas -- VIDEO)
 
The Democratic decline is especially stark in Iowa and Florida, two early Republican primary states where Democrats have lost significant ground.  In Iowa, the number of registered Democrats has declined 7.9 percent since 2008, while the number of registered Republicans has increased by two percent.   In the Sunshine State, Democratic registration decreased by five percent, while Republican registration dipped 2.2 percent.
 
In New Hampshire, Democratic registration plummeted a whopping 14.6 percent, with Republican registration declining a similarly significant 13.5 percent. 

(RELATED: Poll: Gingrich Riding Tea Party Support in Iowa )

In every one of the eight battleground states, Democrats lost ground to Republicans.  (In Colorado, Republicans saw a larger rate of growth in voter registration than Democrats, 1.8 to 0.9 percent.)

The report underscores how much different 2012 will be for Obama than 2008.  Back then, it was commonplace to hear how many new voters the Obama campaign was registering.  Now, it looks like some of those voters, newly disenchanted, are leaving the party rolls.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: battlegroundstates; democraticparty; voterregistration

1 posted on 12/08/2011 8:31:00 PM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Unless they’re switching in order to vote in the Republican primary ...


2 posted on 12/08/2011 8:57:22 PM PST by agrarianlady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; sickoflibs; DoughtyOne; stephenjohnbanker
The group's analysis found that, in the eight politically-pivotal states that register voters by party, a significant number have left the Democratic party since 2008, with many choosing to register as independents.

That doesn't guarantee they will vote for the GOP though. "Independendents" need to be convinced.

3 posted on 12/08/2011 9:00:11 PM PST by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Budget sins can be fixed. Amnesty is irreversible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
"That doesn't guarantee they will vote for the GOP though. "Independendents" need to be convinced."

You're right. Anyone who believe that Independents can be relied upon to bring home the bacon for the Republicans has apparently forgotten the Ross Perot debacle.

4 posted on 12/08/2011 9:17:07 PM PST by davisfh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: agrarianlady

*BINGO!*

If the MSM fails to pick our candidate, then these “former Democrats” will make the backup attempt.


5 posted on 12/08/2011 9:26:51 PM PST by ApplegateRanch (Si, se puede: uno inmigrante ilegale a la vez! Mi corazón sangra como un nabo*. *turnip)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Obama’s not worried. He has an endless supply of voters who either aren’t legal or aren’t alive that will make up for any exodus of living, breathing voters.


6 posted on 12/08/2011 10:10:33 PM PST by OrangeHoof (Obama: The Dr. Kevorkian of the American economy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"In 2012, Independents are likely to turn out in their largest numbers in 35 years, and President Obama will need those Independent votes even more than he did in 2008, if he hopes to be re-elected,"

Highly unlikely that they'll vote Dem - why leave the party? They may simply not vote, or a certain number of them might be trying to cause problems in the GOP primaries. But this isn't good news for the 'Rats.

7 posted on 12/08/2011 10:44:36 PM PST by Major Matt Mason (The Chicago Way isn't the American Way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davisfh

I think it’s an opportunity for conservatives, but they have to explain, for example, why Obama does not represent the interests of the middle class. If they don’t make their case effectively to independendents, we are in trouble.


8 posted on 12/08/2011 10:47:17 PM PST by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Budget sins can be fixed. Amnesty is irreversible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Great Merciful Zeus: Longtime Romney Supporters Abandoning Him in Chicago. Is His “Inevitable” Victory Now Impossible?
December 8, 2011 by Kevin DuJan
http://hillbuzz.org/great-merciful-zeus-longtime-romney-supporters-abandoning-him-in-chicago-is-his-inevitable-victory-now-impossible-70104

(NOTE: Read the comments, too.)

<><><><><>

Larry J. Sabato’s Crystal Ball
12/08/2011

2012 Republican Race: The Field May Not Be Closed

Conventional wisdom is that the Republican presidential field is set, and that it is much too late for a new candidate to enter the race.

In years past, that would be absolutely correct. Over the last few decades, dozens of primaries and caucuses have been shoe-horned into the opening weeks of the election year, with the tendency on the Republican side for the front-running candidate to score a quick knockout.

But next year, the arrangement of the primary calendar is much different. It is less condensed at the front, much more loaded with events at the back, with the prospect of a viable, late-starting candidate quite real.

[snip] Continue reading here: http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/

<><><><><>

Could Sarah Palin Still Get in the Race?

“.....Feb. 14 is the last day that a late entrant could enter the race and reasonably be expected to do well in subsequent races.

The scenario looks something like this: http://voices.yahoo.com/could-sarah-palin-still-race-10634503.html?cat=9


9 posted on 12/08/2011 10:51:37 PM PST by Matchett-PI ("One party will generally represent the envied, the other the envious. Guess which ones." ~GagdadBob)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI

Thanks for the links.


10 posted on 12/08/2011 11:09:52 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: agrarianlady

depends on the state. in many states you can’t be independent and vote in any other parties’ primary other than independent. I know I used to be one and always missed out in voting in the Republican primary. This is one reason I switched over. I am a conservative and wanted to insure my vote in the Republican arena.


11 posted on 12/08/2011 11:48:57 PM PST by GOP Poet (Time for Bambi and his commie crew to go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: davisfh

>> the Ross Perot debacle.

He singlehandedly changed the direction of this Country. Perot knew damn well he would not win.

Let’s begin with the Clinton era concerning national security...


12 posted on 12/09/2011 12:13:10 AM PST by Gene Eric (Save a pretzel for the gas jets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI

I love the Boyz! I’m a frequent reader. That is one very astute bunch of people WRT Chicago politics.

I don’t know all of the filing deadlines, but I believe if Sarah was going to enter the race, she would have a lot of ground to make up, unless she’s been organizing on the sly.

I wish she would enter the race, but I don’t think it’s feasible at this point. :o(


13 posted on 12/09/2011 12:28:43 AM PST by dixiechick2000 (Proud barbarian TEA Party SOB and, apparently, an evil Capitalist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GOP Poet

In Oregon, there is an Independent party, and we have closed primaries. So, I am currently considered unaffiliated.

I need to register with a party to vote in the primary, or I won’t be able to vote. Our primary isn’t until May.

In 2008, for the very first time in my life, I registered as a ‘rat so that I could vote for Hillary!, and against Obama.


14 posted on 12/09/2011 12:33:02 AM PST by dixiechick2000 (Proud barbarian TEA Party SOB and, apparently, an evil Capitalist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

825,000 probably dumped or purged off the rolls because they could not be verified and were probably the acorn fake voters that were stuffed onto the rolls in 2008 but are slowly getting wiped off.


15 posted on 12/09/2011 1:42:48 AM PST by sunmars
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: agrarianlady

That might be. It would account for the lower loss of membership that the Republicans experienced. Is the figure the number who have actually left the party, or the net growth or loss?


16 posted on 12/09/2011 2:19:02 AM PST by Eleutheria5 (Diplomacy is war by other means.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: davisfh

The Republican Party forgot the Ross Perot debacle; they don’t understand that even if splitting the vote means another Obama term, some people still vote on principle.

The same thing sunk Gore with Nader supporters, and Nader deflected any blame from himself; he has always maintained that Al Gore cost Al Gore the election.


17 posted on 12/09/2011 2:36:57 AM PST by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

Ross Perot didn’t run to win; he ran to give a voice to many people not represented by the 2 segments of the one party we have (Republicrats). He won 19% of the vote - that is significant, and in my eyes justifies what he did (even though BJ Clinton was horrible). Clinton also learned from it, and was a better “Republican” than the one he followed.


18 posted on 12/09/2011 2:41:08 AM PST by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; neverdem; DoughtyOne; stephenjohnbanker
RE :"That doesn't guarantee they will vote for the GOP though. "Independendents" need to be convinced."

Exactly, and so far I don't see Republicans that are very good at that.

19 posted on 12/09/2011 5:02:40 AM PST by sickoflibs (Cain :"Plan B is to quit, but not call it quitting. Instead call it fighting")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GOP Poet

I met an elderly couple from North Carolina who were staunch Jesse Helmes-Republicans, but they were registered as Democrats their entire lives so they could vote in the Dem primary.

And here in Virginia, primaries are open! It’s operation chaos all the time.

Not that I’m entirely cynical. I’m sure most do vote party affiliation.


20 posted on 12/09/2011 5:51:13 AM PST by agrarianlady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2
"Ross Perot didn’t run to win;"

That's right - he ran to "get back" at the Bush family, with whom he had a long-running fued. And he succeeded in blocking Bush's re-election and gave us Bill Clinton.

Perot saddled the country with a lying, cheating, coke-sniffing hillbilly in the White House to carry out his vendetta against the Bush family. What a patriot! /sarc

21 posted on 12/09/2011 10:07:30 AM PST by In Maryland ("Truth? We don't need no stinkin' truth!" - Official Motto of the Main Stream Media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: In Maryland

Well said. I agree.


22 posted on 12/09/2011 10:11:20 AM PST by Fu-fu2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

>> Clinton also learned from it, and was a better “Republican” than the one he followed.

The Towers would still be standing if Perot stood down — my subjective opinion of course.


23 posted on 12/09/2011 12:44:51 PM PST by Gene Eric (Save a pretzel for the gas jets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

“The Towers would still be standing if Perot stood down — my subjective opinion of course.”

Arabs in my class were questioned by the FBI when the towers were first bombed in 1993, about a month after Clinton took office. Republicans weren’t doing anything about expired visas or illegal aliens, either.


24 posted on 12/09/2011 2:08:58 PM PST by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: In Maryland

19% is not “getting back at someone”; he talked about things that were being ignored by both parties who were interested in seeing our jobs sent overseas.


25 posted on 12/09/2011 2:12:15 PM PST by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI

bttt


26 posted on 12/14/2011 8:04:41 AM PST by GOPJ (Better is a dinner of herbs where love is, Than a fatted calf with hatred - Proverbs 15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson