Skip to comments.Romney turnout 6.8% HIGHER in "Battleground" States than McCain (Vanity)
Posted on 11/07/2012 7:11:45 PM PST by Strategerist
Comparing 2008 vote totals to 2012 (with some numbers projected, as for example Colorado only has 90% of the votes in) overall in VA, NC, OH, NH, PA, FL, MI, MN, WI, CO, IA, NV (all states were also battleground states in 2008) Romney had 21,674,900 votes to 20,300,366 for McCain in those states, for a 6.8% advantage.
In every individual battleground state Romney turnout was higher than McCain, from 20.4% higher in Nevada to 0.6% higher in PA. Ohio Romney turnout was 7.3% higher than McCain.
In the non-battleground state of NY, Romney had 6.6% LESS turnout than McCain. Interestingly in CA Romney turnout was up 5.1%, and in TX it was up 5.9%.
And they’ll always have an advantage: send a bus to a housing project and it will bring a bus load of Dem voters to the polls.
R’s will never match that efficiency.
they had a very good presence in 2004 and they had the evangelicals doing the yeomen’s work. These people returned to their lives after it was over. The democrats start working the day after it was over.
Remember in 2004, Pelosi and Reid and a few other democrats were quoting bible verses in a national press conference the day after Bush won? That was when they started to court voters for the 2006 fiasco.They peeled away enough church-goers with a faux conservative message to turn a mid-term into a national event.
There are some people posting incomplete turnout information in an effort to make a case for Palin. There isn’t one. While completely unfair, at this point Palin is just too divisive - too many women dislike her and the media has had too long to turn her into something of a joke outside of GOP circles.
I don’t understand turnout was higher ...Ohio for example Mcain got 2,677,820 votes, Obama got 2,940,044
Romney got 2,586,467 votes, Obama got 2,686,609
even if all votes aren’t in in Ohio,( they seem to be, including the absentee) just not certified. I’m having a tough time doing the math where Romney turnout is 7.3% higher.
My apologies, I used a "spreadsheet" with "equations" and "data" and other things that godless commies like Nate Silver use, and that any true conservative rightly disdains.
Speaking of Turnout, I just did a quick lookup of the Obama vs McCain popular vote as compared to the Obama vs Romney Popular vote and here is what I see:
2008: Obama: 69,456,897 McCain: 59,934,814
TOTAL VOTES CAST: 129,391,711
Obama Victory Margin: 52.9% to 45.7% (9,522,083 votes)
Obama: 365 EV McCain: 173 EV
2012: Obama: 60,652,149 Romney: 57,810,390
TOTAL VOTES CAST: 118,462,539 (2,841,759 votes)
Obama Victory Margin: 51.2% to 48.8%
Assuming Obama takes Florida (which as of this writing is still uncalled)...
Obama: 332 EV Romney: 206 EV
What I find interesting are the following:
1) There were more people who voted in 2008 compared to 2012.
2) McCain got MORE votes in 2008 than Romney in 2012. In fact, McCain got 2,124,424 MORE VOTES than Romney !!
QUESTION : WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE 2,124,424 McCAIN VOTES IN 2012?
3) Obama LOST OVER 8,804,748 Votes in 2012 compared to 2008!!
QUESTION: What happened to those 8,804,748 voters? Did they stay home?
I can only conclude the following, based on the above observations:
* There was LESS ENTHUSIASM by Americans to vote in 2012 than in 2008.
* Contrary to what we were led to believe by the GOP and what some FReepers claim they saw on the ground in their state, REPUBLICANS WERE NOT ENTHUSIASTIC TO VOTE THIS YEAR. In fact, I can see at least 2 Million of them staying home this year compared to 2008 based on the above numbers.
So much for the huge Get Out the Vote Effort, the huge, sellout crowds in Red Rocks Colorado and in Ohio...
* Even though Obama lost over 8 Million votes this year, most of those voters DID NOT switch to Romney, preferring to stay home ( I suspect many of these would be the disappointed youth of 2008 and the socially conservative blacks of 2008. The former still can’t find good jobs and the latter couldn’t vote for a gay marriage supporting candidate. However, they still could not vote for Romney. So, they stayed home ).
Also, I cannot help but conclude that a huge proportion of the GOP base STAYED HOME in 2012. Otherwise, where were the over 2 million votes that went to McCain in 2008?
This was a self-inflicted loss on the part of the Republicans.
I used the same 2012 Romney figure, but only 90% of the votes are in.
Thus the 2,586,467 was divided by .9. Final total may be a little off that, of course, depending on where the last 10% of votes are from , and I apologize for the satanic voodoo of manipulating the numbers.
10% are still out in Ohio. 14% are still not counted in New York. And that is just states I've looked at.
That's almost all the discrepancy just based on that.
The problem is demographic. Obama and the Dems are cleaning up in the 19 to 29 vote and the 30-44 vote, which comprised about 46% of the total vote. Romney won the age groups above 45 but not by the same margins. The GOP has a youth problem. We are not replacing our ranks as the old folks like me die out.
Why do you persist in using these bogus figures? There are millions of votes that need to be added to those totals. How can you draw such conclusions with a lack of data?
Maybe it is time to ditch the EC, it seems to no longer be our friend.
The California GOP is a joke! They are terrible! I don’t know what to do about it.
and they have several weeks to bus them with all the early voting
You wouldn't lose "moderate" votes; you'd lose liberals who are spoon-fed whatever the MSM tells them -- liberal sheep. The problem is the press, who frames the language and the terms, and has (in effect) a "go-to" laundry list of smears with which to attack any Republican who shows signs of successful populism.
It's why we get RINO squishes in the Senate, while retaining the house: the press can dog-whistle masses of unthinking liberal vermin (like you, or your nuclear physicist anti-Palin friend from Virginia you mentioned on the other thread) from the blue centers to swamp the vote against any conservative.
The left has not just marched through the institutions willy-nilly: they concentrated on taking the key policy or funding positions among all societal organs which shape and disseminate opinion: and their first care was to bend opinions back ("crimethink") to marginalize, and make stereotypable, any principled opposition to their goals; or even to make it criminal in law, by proffering members of selected victim groups as spokespeople or power holders in key positions.
The key is to take back the youth and the press; and this is the more difficult simply because of the Marxist, totalitarian mindset of the intellectual left, which brooks no dissent, and cannot be shamed into allowing even token conservatives a seat at the table, nor allowing any of their own to stray from the fold "political correctness." (Larry Summers was the youngest PhD recipient in Harvard's history, I'm told; but one remark about innate gender differences and he was out on his ear; while Elizabeth Brown made unsubstantiated, likely-lieing-through-her-teeth claims of being part Indian to make it onto Harvard Law's faculty, while representing corporate clients such as Dow Chemical, and is hailed as a Champion of the oppressed.)
Careless misinterpretation on Strategerist's part, or careful indoctrination?
He had a higher percentage of a MUCH SMALLER vote total.
IIRC the total voter turnout was 50.1% (which, allowing for voter fraud by the Dems) was likely < 50%).
Romney was (as many here pointed out long ago) the favorite of the left: Bain Capital, flip-flopper, Mormon, rich, white bread.
If he had drawn larger numbers (absolutely -- from both Evangelicals and the mythical "undecideds") he would have won.
He lost the evangelicals on being Mormon, and on a history of liberalism / flip-flopping / abortion support.
He lost the moderates by allowing Obama to make a photo-op with Chris Christie to distract from Benghazi, and not countering the easily-manipulated slut vote on the idea that he'd "take away their birth control" (Griswold v. Connecticut anyone?)
It wasn’t careless, and it certainly wasn’t a misinterpretion. It is exactly what is happening, including in your own reply.
This is just...incomprehensible.
You can't fight stupid people. If it didn't happen now with a loser like obama -- it ain't happening. It has to be all about looking our for ourselves and our loved ones. Screw everyone else.