But it is starting to become clear that it was really the Dems' superior "ground game" that beat us this year.
Here is my reasoning:
Despite admirable GOTV efforts on the part of many volunteers, our side put less effort into our ground game than did the Dems.
We assumed that conservatives and "broken glass Republicans" would to come out to vote in record numbers on election day, Nov 6.
And conversely, we'd expected dampened enthusiasm for Obama amongst previous strong supporters, e.g. college students and black Christians.
Our assumption about dampened support for Obama turned out to be correct. 2012 election statistics now show that the 2012 vote total for Obama from college students was down, compared to 2008.
Similarly, the vote total for Obama from Hispanics was also down.
In fact, it appears that Obama lost votes from almost all sectors of his base, compared to 2008.
So it turns out that voter enthusiasm for Obama WAS, in fact, dampened.
Then how did Dems manage to get enough votes from these more lukewarm members of their base?
The answer, I believe, is indicated in the equation above.
Note that an essential part of the Dems' ground game success is their manipulation of the opportunity for "early voting." Dems now use this extra time to stuning advantage; their GOTV teams in some states were able to bribe/bus their supporters to the polls weeks ahead of election day.
We, on the other hand, relied to a greater degree on our base's preference for voting on traditional election day. When our turnout fell short of expectations, we had no time to try to rectify the situation.
MORAL OF THE STORY:
The "early voting" phenomenon is not going to go away. If we are to be successful in presidential elections, ever again, we are going to have to emulate the Dems' ground game.
No, that does not mean we will bribe voters like Dems do. But we will have to put much more effort and $ into getting our voters to the polls early.
This is true. While I do think demographics (mostly Hispanics) and how enormously unpopular Republicans are now with the younger, more libertine, generations is still a big part of our problem, we also have to find a way to emulate the Democrat early voting effort and overall ground game.
Look, Obama came in with no ID out of no where. He became President in not one but two identical elections which is near impossible to do. Cheating, lies, fraud, smearing and stealing is his MO. I say don’t allow him to take office for his second term and charge him with treason.
yes the dems had a strong ground game and used dirty tactics to bribe voters, however the over-riding reason why the GOP lost was because they lack a backbone and allowed the left to paint them as mean devisive, obstructionists who want ot deny women health care and htrow granny over the cliff- they were very successful at this and hte gop ALLOWED them to do this to them without lifting a figner to fight back agaisnt the left- The left LIED and NOONE called them to the carpet for it- Noone! Someone like Mark Levine if he were to run woudl have NEVER allowed the left to misrepresent him so dramatically andh e would not have let them get away with hteir dirty tactics- the GOP apparently has becoem incapable of effectively defendign htemselves agaisnt the false accusations of the left- and it’s proven very effective tactic of the left in winning elections-
On of the things we learned in Viet Nam is that a DMZ only gets US killed and keep US from winning the war. In Iraq/Afghanistan, if you only get to return fire if/when you are being directly fired upon, we are sitting ducks to take the first round each and every time. You see, whenever there are UNEQUAL rules of engagement, the side willing and able to do the absolute most damage will win every time.
We as Republicans tend to be honest, fair minded, moral, rule followers. We are at war for the heart and soul of this country against an enemy that has NO such scruples.
Now I have heard people say that if you have to win by breaking the rules, it makes the winning a hypocrisy. OK, so we follow the rules scrupulously and DON’T win -— what did that get us in the long run besides further down the road to socialism.
The winner gets to make AND enforce the rules. The only way the rules mean anything at all is if WE actually WIN -— because we all know that they are going to turn a blind eye to any and every rule and win by every means possible.
So, we need to adopt their playbook: buy pizza, give away cigarettes and beer, pay someone at the senior centers to “help” the seniors vote, etc.
Do we really WANT to WIN, or do we want to pat ourselves on the back for doing the right thing as they load us on the cattle cars???
As I type I'm hearing Karl Rove on television in the next room ... Rove is saying that Hispanics were the only group who gave Obama a higher total in 2012, compared to 2008.
So I guess Obama's UNCONSTITUTIONAL bribe gift to illegal immigrants, last June, worked:
Krauthammer: Obama's fiat order is naked lawlessness
RINO File.
Listening to descriptions of how “Democrats got out their ground game” with “superior ability to bring those to the polls who normally would never go” by the commentators on Fox election night..made me realize..what they actually have done is track names that HAVE NOT VOTED IN MANY, MANY elections cycles....and vote them.
A well-funded project, county-by-county..to examine the names signed in at at the polls..and going out to find those individuals..you’ll find they were never physically at he polls..or they themselves never filled out the absentee ballot....or their names in the death registers.