Skip to comments.The Voters Who Stayed Home (The Key to Understanding the Results of the 2012 Elections)
Posted on 11/10/2012 5:13:59 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The key to understanding the 2012 election is simple: A huge slice of the electorate stayed home.
The punditocracy which is more of the ruling class than an eye on the ruling class has naturally decided that this is because Republicans are not enough like Democrats: They need to play more identity politics (in particular, adopt the Lefts embrace of illegal immigration) in order to be viable. But the story is not about who voted; it is about who didnt vote. In truth, millions of Americans have decided that Republicans are not a viable alternative because they are already too much like Democrats. They are Washington. With no hope that a Romney administration or more Republicans in Congress would change this sad state of affairs, these voters shrugged their shoulders and became non-voters.
This is the most important election of our lifetime. That was the ubiquitous rally cry of Republican leaders. The country yawned. About 11 million fewer Americans voted for the two major-party candidates in 2012 119 million, down from 130 million in 2008. In fact, even though our population has steadily increased in the last eight years (adding 16 million to the 2004 estimate of 293 million Americans), about 2 million fewer Americans pulled the lever for Obama and Romney than for George W. Bush and John Kerry.
That is staggering. And, as if to ensure that conservatives continue making the same mistakes that have given us four more years of ruinous debt, economic stagnation, unsustainable dependency, Islamist empowerment, and a crippling transfer of sovereignty to global tribunals, Tuesdays post-mortems fixate on the unremarkable fact that reliable Democratic constituencies broke overwhelmingly for Democrats. Again, to focus on the vote is to miss the far more consequential non-vote. The millions who stayed home relative to the 2008 vote equal the population of Ohio the decisive state. If just a sliver of them had come out for Romney, do you suppose the media would be fretting about the Democrats growing disconnect with white people?
Obama lost an incredible 9 million voters from his 2008 haul. If told on Monday that fully 13 percent of the presidents support would vanish, the GOP establishment would have stocked up on champagne and confetti.
To be sure, some of the Obama slide is attributable to super-storm Sandy. Its chaotic aftermath reduced turnout in a couple of big blue states: New York, where about 6 million people voted, and New Jersey, where 3.5 million did. That is down from 2008 by 15 and 12 percent, respectively. Yet, given that these solidly Obama states were not in play, and that thanks to Chris Christies exuberance our hyper-partisan president was made to look like a bipartisan healer, Sandy has to be considered a big net plus on Obamas ledger.
There also appears to have been some slippage in the youth vote, down 3 percent from 2008 levels 49 percent participation, down from 52 percent. But even with this dip, the under-30 crowd was a boon for the president. Thanks to the steep drop in overall voter participation, the youth vote actually increased as a percentage of the electorate 19 percent, up from 18 percent. Indeed, if there is any silver lining for conservatives here, its that Obama was hurt more by the decrease in his level of support from this demographic down six points from the 66 percent he claimed in 2008 than by the marginal drop in total youth participation. It seems to be dawning on at least some young adults that Obamaville is a bleak place to build a future.
Put aside the fact that, as the election played out, Sandy was a critical boost for the president. Lets pretend that it was just a vote drain one that explains at least some of the slight drop in young voters. What did it really cost Obama? Maybe a million votes? It doesnt come close to accounting for the cratering of his support. Even if he had lost only 8 million votes, that would still have been 11 percent of his 2008 vote haul gone poof. Romney should have won going away.
Yet, he did not. Somehow, Romney managed to pull nearly 2 million fewer votes than John McCain, one of the weakest Republican nominees ever, and one who ran in a cycle when the party had sunk to historic depths of unpopularity. How to explain that?
The brute fact is: There are many people in the country who believe it makes no difference which party wins these elections. Obama Democrats are the hard Left, but Washingtons Republican establishment is progressive, not conservative. This has solidified statism as the bipartisan mainstream. Republicans may want to run Leviathan many are actually perfectly happy in the minority but they have no real interest in dismantling Leviathan. They are simply not about transferring power out of Washington, not in a material way.
As the 2012 campaign elucidated, the GOP wants to be seen as the party of preserving the unsustainable welfare state. When it comes to defense spending, they are just as irresponsible as Democrats in eschewing adult choices. Yes, Democrats are reckless in refusing to acknowledge the suicidal costs of their cradle-to-grave nanny state, but the Republican campaign called for enlarging a military our current spending on which dwarfs the combined defense budgets of the next several highest-spending nations. When was the last time you heard a Republican explain what departments and entitlements hed slash to pay for that? In fact, when did the GOP last explain how a country that is in a $16 trillion debt hole could afford to enlarge anything besides its loan payments?
Our bipartisan ruling class is obtuse when it comes to the cliff were falling off and I dont mean Januarys so-called Taxmageddon, which is a day at the beach compared to whats coming.
As ZeroHedge points out, we now pay out $250 billion more on mandatory obligations (i.e., just entitlements and interest on the debt) than we collect in taxes. Understand, thats an annual deficit of a quarter trillion dollars before one thin dime is spent on the exorbitant $1.3 trillion discretionary budget a little over half of which is defense spending, and the rest the limitless array of tasks that Republicans, like Democrats, have decided the states and the people cannot handle without Washington overlords.
What happens, moreover, when we have a truly egregious Washington scandal, like the terrorist murder of Americans in Benghazi? What do Republicans do? The partys nominee decides the issue is not worth engaging on cutting the legs out from under Americans who see Benghazi as a debacle worse than Watergate, as the logical end of the Beltways pro-Islamist delirium. In the void, the party establishment proceeds to delegate its response to John McCain and Lindsey Graham: the self-styled foreign-policy gurus who urged Obama to entangle us with Benghazis jihadists in the first place, and who are now pushing for a repeat performance in Syria a new adventure in Islamist empowerment at a time when most Americans have decided Iraq was a catastrophe and Afghanistan is a death trap where our straitjacketed troops are regularly shot by the ingrates theyve been sent to help.
Republicans talk about limited central government, but they do not believe in it or, if they do, they lack confidence that they can explain its benefits compellingly. Theyve bought the Democrats core conceit that the modern world is just too complicated for ordinary people to make their way without bureaucratic instruction. They look at a money-hemorrhaging disaster like Medicare, whose unsustainability is precisely caused by the intrusion of government, and they say, Lets preserve it in fact, lets make its preservation the centerpiece of our campaign.
The calculation is straightforward: Republicans lack the courage to argue from conviction that health care would work better without federal mandates and control that safety nets are best designed by the states, the people, and local conditions, not Washington diktat. In their paralysis, we are left with a system that will soon implode, a system that will not provide care for the people being coerced to pay in. Most everybody knows this is so, yet Republicans find themselves too cowed or too content to advocate dramatic change when only dramatic change will save us. They look at education, the mortgage crisis, and a thousand other things the same way intimidated by the press, unable to articulate the case that Washington makes things worse.
Truth be told, most of todays GOP does not believe Washington makes things worse. Republicans think the federal government by confiscating, borrowing, and printing money is the answer to every problem, rather than the source of most. That is why those running the party today, when they ran Washington during the Bush years, orchestrated an expansion of government size, scope, and spending that would still boggle the mind had Obama not come along. (See Jonah Goldbergs jaw-dropping tally from early 2004 long before we knew their final debt tab would come to nearly $5 trillion.) No matter what they say in campaigns, todays Republicans are champions of massive, centralized government. They just think it needs to be run smarter as if the problem were not human nature and the nature of government, but just that we havent quite gotten the org-chart right yet.
That is not materially different from what the Democrats believe. Its certainly not an alternative. For Americans who think elections can make a real difference, Tuesday pitted proud progressives against reticent progressives; slightly more preferred the true-believers. For Americans who dont see much daylight between the two parties one led by the president who keeps spending money we dont have and the other by congressional Republicans who keep writing the checks and extending the credit line voting wasnt worth the effort.
Those 9 million Americans need a new choice. We all do.
Andrew C. McCarthy is a senior fellow at the National Review Institute and the executive director of the Philadelphia Freedom Center. He is the author, most recently, of Spring Fever: The Illusion of Islamic Democracy, which was published by Encounter Books.
You are a fool... and you are about to reap a fool's harvest.
The Tea Party didn’t show up, for whatever reason.
Because, in multiethnic societies, the blood is everything.
Dear Fool, we will not be winning any elections. Obamacare is here to stay and our guns will be taken.
It is over at the ballot box.
Thick headedness is not a virtue.
I am so glad Alan West is fighting! Voter fraud needs to be exposed. Who are the sheeple now?!
“If the GOP wants my vote, it needs to run a conservative nominee.”
Then we need closed primaries, state by state.
We will never again have a conservative candidate, because Dems crossover and vote for our candidates in our primaries.
They were warned, repeatedly.
I’ve got to leave this thread...I can’t bear to hear anymore from these idiots who are proud that they stayed home.
I imagine you don't care about that. However, it will make a difference to your heirs.
The counting still goes on. Millions will be added to the 2012 totals. I am surprised that McCarthy has bought into this meme. The current total vote is now 120 million. 71% of CA has reported. 55% of WA. 75% of OR.
Just like the Perot voters who gave us 8 years of Clinton you’ve given us 8 years of Obama. The worst president in history because of people like you.
We sure do, but we need more than that.
That's how you talk about people you want to vote for your candidate? Seriously? How well does that get your candidate elected?
Your attitude and actions are what kept people away. Water... duck's back... Cow.... cabbage....
Change that or keep losing.
I agree. Obama won this election by the stay at homes (and fraud). To all those, including some freepers, how did that staying home, or write-in, or 3rd party vote turn out for you? Do you think you taught/punished the GOP enough? Will they run a more conservative candidate?
If you want me to vote for your candidate, run a conservative.
It's that easy.
My heirs will be just peachy keen. They are better shots than this old guy.
My response is a pox on the people i.e. deluded fools who stayed home and let a socialist run the country four more years.
STay at home because they are “all the same” I fear that this message has not yet gotten to the “leadership” of the republican party. The did a fair job of holding up legislation in the last congress but they did not stop spending!! So mountains of debt still looks like a wahsington problem that can’t be voted out.
Romney will top McCain's 60M in 2008 and probably end up closer to Bush's 62M in 2004.
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.