Skip to comments.Mitt Romney has fewer votes than John McCain received in 2008! Republicans stayed home
Posted on 11/07/2012 1:14:10 AM PST by Arthurio
Mitt Romney has fewer votes than John McCain received in 2008! Republicans stayed home!
As of right now, Romney has close to 56,000,000 votes nationwide. In 2008, John McCain had nearly 60,000,000 votes. (Per Wikipedia)
It looks like if all the people who voted for McCain turned out again and voted for Romney, we would have been rid of the Kenyan once and for all.
People stayed home.
It looks like all the Freepers who said they'd never vote for Mitt were not making idle threats
better check out those voting machines
is anyone going to investigate the machines and who handles them..are they union made..do the chicoms make them...where do they come from and who sets them?
You are a character :)
I am skeptical of your claim, O accepted and signed the extension of all the tax cuts late 2010 including cap gains and high income. Then he ran against it. In fact he ran against it before he signed it too. That talk was candy to his lib base. And it obviously workled for him too. But now who knows what he will try?
If he holds a hard line NOW then the automatic spending cuts and tax increases together will doom his party in the next midterm, unless the Boehner crowd are his bitches.
Wouldnt now be the time for the House to take a stand, while talking publically 'working together' ?
So, what impact did Freepublic.com have relating to the Romney loss?
Rush too, and those who gave lots of $$$ to Rove.
Today Brett Baur Grapeline did a ranking of polls by correctness and Rasmussen and Gallup were the most off using a 2004 voter turnout model. Shopping for a poll that tells you what you want to believe always backfires.
When you say churches I assume you mean Catholic Churches over that mandate. Well maybe if Catholics voted for Romney he would have won. But the mixed messages sent out by the CCs hardly inspired them doing that, even if so many of those who called themselves Catholics were actually opposed to birth control, which many are not.
Well, we tried to warn the GOP that Romney might not be the best uniter of our base. We all knew he’d do a great job fiscally compared to Obama and possibly better than GW too. But we also knew that he had a lot of unnessassary baggage, such as changing his mind on abortion — not rock ribbed enough.
Whatever reason, now those ‘brilliant’ GOP establishment types think we need to hispander. Yeah, that’ll get us in ‘good’ with’em, right? /sarc
“Mitt Romney has fewer votes than John McCain received in 2008! Republicans stayed home”
Face it....a bunch of so called ‘christians’ refused to vote for a Mormon! This is what their misplaced angst gets us.
I honestly dont personally know any Republicans who refused to vote for him. But I live in Maryland so I cant conclude much from that as we were irrelevent in that race as were you in CA.
There was something bigger going on than this claim about Rs not showing up. I mean did they refuse to vote for any Republicans House and Senate because they dont like Romney?How about Akin? That had nothing to do with Mitt.
Nationwide vote numbers are about as worthless as all those nation-wide polls being posted here BEFORE election day. Obama targeted those states he needed to win. I was warning about this here but most here seemed sure Romney would win easily and shopped for polls that said what they wanted to see. Rasm and Gallop were the most wrong.
>> Face it....a bunch of so called christians refused to vote for a Mormon! This is what their misplaced angst gets us.
Only relevant in the battleground states.
Nice to see you again AB. You see Krauthammmer wants immigration reform again? You know that will be a regular topic.
I think given these data, the answer to what happened Tuesday is obvious: Apathy on the part of the base, coupled with a predominant sentiment (on “our” side, conservative and conservative leaning) that anyone could beat Obama this time around, led to lower voter turnout.
Couple all of that with the fact that the enhusiasm level *for* Obama was much higher than anticipated, (and maybe even a little Sandy help), and that’s pretty much it, game over.
The take home lesson from this is that one should never take anything for granted (I.e, believing turnout wouldn’t be like in 2008), and also never “support” a candidate you don’t REALLY support.
There’s just no substitute for enthusiasm. Not in politics anyway.
What’s still a shocker to me is to believe that half this country was/is STILL “enthusiastic” for Obama! It’s like we live in another world.
If those Republicans stayed home in 2010 instead then O would be history now.
That is the sad irony and paradox.
I was surprised we ran an actual elected official against Rush . (part time small town mayor or not).
A shame he stood no chance and would have done no worse if he had been a potted plant with an R next to his name. :(
I remember my grandma’s town Hazel Crest had “local parties” one was called “New Vision” I saw a sign and thought it was advertizing eye glasses.
Both local tickets were Black democrat, one was the Jesse Jackson faction the other the Shaw brothers faction (remember them?).
You are both ancient mariners!
I am a mere tadpole of 29!
And when I realized I’d be 33 by the 2016 election I suddenly became very depressed. ;p
We can’t afford to have him resign, KY has a rat Governor.
It will be interesting to see if McConnell retires after this term or not.
I heard Obama is gonna bestow knightly honors on DSCC chairmoron Patty Murray.
Meanwhile John Cornyn the NRSC chairman should be shot for the last 2 elections.
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.