Skip to comments.Are Conservatives Abandoning Romney? [Say What?!? 7-10% of Tea Party Evangelicals support Obama??]
Posted on 09/17/2012 7:31:00 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
There have been 16 public polls conducted in swing states within the last week and there is an alarming statistic, consistent in all the polls regardless of the pollster party bias, that should have the Romney camp more than a little worried and possibly perplexed.
The numbers are clear that self-described conservatives are not supporting Governor Romney in sufficient numbers to win the election. Additionally there is anecdotal evidence that Evangelicals and Tea Party supporters are not embracing the Romney-Ryan ticket at levels that would be expected.
Looking at the crosstabs of the polls conducted in Colorado, Florida, New Hampshire, Ohio and Virginia within the last ten days, and averaging the support for Obama and Romney by ideology, the chart below speaks thousands of words.
Obama has a 7% greater support level among liberals than Romney has among conservatives, and a 6.8% favorable delta among likely voters who are bolting from the base. Without any demographic adjustment, using the raw data from the polls in those five states, Obama has an average lead of 2.5%.
If conservatives were supporting Governor Romney at the same level liberals are supporting President Obama, without any change to the level of support from self-described moderates, Romney could have a 4% plus lead in five states that have a total of 73 electoral votes
With my current electoral map showing Obama with 237 votes and Romney with 222, 73 votes is the ballgame, and by a comfortable margin.
In addition to the ideology breakdowns, the crosstabs show Tea Party supporters favor Romney over Obama, 85.0% to 10.6%, and Evangelical Christians favor Romney over Obama, 63.0% to 28.2%. Now I can immediately write-off a large part of the evangelical numbers because three of the polls conducted by Marist Polling state that 33% of evangelicals support Obama and that skews the numbers badly.
What I cant write off is there are 7% to 10% of the electorate who describe themselves as either Tea Partiers or Evangelical Christians that are supporting Barack Obama in these five critical states. This is the empirical part of questioning the lack of support from ultra-conservatives within the Republican Party.
Anecdotally speaking there is also evidence that a faction of the party, large enough to insure a Romney-Ryan victory, is not fully behind the GOP ticket. In the last week I have received a minimum of a dozen emails from Tea Party organizations and other ultra-conservative groups demanding the ouster of Barack Obama in November but failing to even mention the names, Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan.
A few of these organizations may have charters as 527s or another quasi-political group that prevents them from expressing specific support for a given candidate but I know the vast majority are not. So the question that begs to be asked of these groups is if you want Obama gone, why are you not advocating for a Romney-Ryan victory in November?
We are looking at a presidential race today that literally is a statistical tie, and yes I know that phrase is overworked but it is the truth, with President Obama having the upper hand. Clearly there is somewhere between 7% and 15% of conservatives who, while seemingly committed to seeing Obama as a one-term president, are not supporting the only option to victory in November that achieves their stated goal.
So my answer to the question asked is yes, conservatives are abandoning Romney, and that is an answer many Republicans must find unsettling.
I believe in the checks and balances. We've survived 4 years of Obama. We'll survive another 4 years of Obama.
I don't buy the sky is falling so we have to elect the GOP liberal instead of the 'rat liberal.
The GOP is failing because they didn't offer an alternative to Obama. They offered a "me too" "hope and change" solution.
Your post was removed because it was "making it personal" - referring to another Freeper, personally, as a "traitor."
To avoid flame wars on the Religion Forum, the guideline here is to discuss the ISSUES, not the individual Freepers. So not only personal attacks are disallowed, e.g. "you're a coward" - but ad hominems also, e.g. "you think" or "you want" or "you're being foolish."
Click here for more guidelines to the Religion Forum.
Doesn’t matter to me who she endorses. I’m not voting for a Leftist Pubbie or Dem.
Collectivism has never worked any where or any time it has been tried. The only thing it has ever been successful at doing is killing and destroying everything it touches.
If you like drinking the Leftist Pubbie Fool-Aid then drink it like there’s no tomorrow.
A vote for Romney or Obama is a vote for collectivism resulting in the destruction of America.
The one trend both Leftist parties hate seeing is the rise in the continuing number of independent voters who are sick and tired of the charade.
The damage that 0 has done, and will continue to do, on this country will be irrevocable. I understand you don't believe that, but I do. Mitt's not the first choice of most FReepers, but I do believe he loves this country and does not want to further our demise. 0's intentions are clear - and our "checks and balances" are NOT working under his reign of "boot on the necks" (SCOTUS BammyCare decision, debt ceiling, etc.) .
I am voting against Obama and you need to do that, too, no matter how vile he might be relative the “true” conservative you want. IF you chose not to vote against Obama, you have basically cast a vote for him (I can actually explain that if you like and it explains a lot of GOP behavior...).
I don’t like Romney - he was the governor of the “Bluest” state in the Union - by definition there has to be a lot wrong with him. But right now, I’d vote for a GOP Hillary! to get Obama out. Obama is that bad.
Besides, I knew it would come to this. There were too many real conservatives running and they split the conservative vote. Didn’t help that my favorite crashed and burned.
“I’m not voting for a liberal. Regardless of party.”
Then in all likelihood, by your standards, I’ll guess you won’t be voting in a U.S. presidential election again?
My vote for Sarah isn’t just a vote against Obama it is also a vote against Romney and Leftism.
Do you think that if Mittens is voted in that he will stop America from going over the fiscal cliff because of the Progressive policies instituted by both parties over the decades? Even if he tried to reverse course and bring sanity to this situation it’s way to late for that.
He will carry on what Obama, Bush 43, Clinton, Bush 41, Reagan, et al have been doing whether the American people like it or not.
If Mittens is elected let’s see how disallusioned you and the other FReepers are after four more years of Progressivism.
There is a huge disconnect, so I must be missing something. The older child, a boy of nearly 12, is an enthusiastic worker. I have employed him for lawn mowing and such. He is very conservative and really, when you talk with the parents, they are, as well. This is a hard-working family, with close-knit values who are a contributing part of their community.
The point, IMO, is that these are good folks. They play by the rules. They have lost and still seem to back the perpetrator of their own loss. It does seem stupid, but, again, except for this idee fixe about zer0, they don’t manifest stupidity.
All I can think of is that somehow we have watched a huge change in the definition of *good* and, as the progs will tell us, endlessly: “People want to be good”. Evidently, they also want to be good even if it kills them.
Also, there apparently has been a successful push to characterize Romney/Republicans as *not good*. There are people who should be backing our side, but they cannot because they are convinced that we are *bad*. I mentioned on another thread that recently I have read statements to the effect that folks will leave the country if Romney is elected. These are not the usual suspects, but friends of friends who are outspoken conservative Christians. The writer posts a lot of conservative statements. It is the _idea_ of Romney and the GOP that frightens her, not the reality.
I am afraid I can’t get disillusioned. I don’t have any expectations.
It seems like there are FReepers that are all gung-ho for him thinking that he’s going to be sooooo different from Obama. In some ways, yes, but the Progressive Program for America will still continue to roll on.
Was the last tyrant bad? Yeah! So let’s vote in another tyrant! Yeah!
Bovines and sheep are all that come to mind.
I see it as more like a choice between a Euroweenie socialist and a hard line communist. We can’t stop the trip to Hell, but we can slow the hand basket just a bit.
I share some of your contempt for the choices we face. Having said that, our time to fight the eGOP is during the primary and during the off season from the ground up. Skipping the vote guarantees a certified Marxist will be elected.
Romney, no matter how many faults, is clearly a better choice. If I were trapped in a forest fire, and had to choose between the fire (obama), and crawling through the sewer(eGOP) to escape..ok both suck, but one will kill you for sure. The other is foul and may kill you, but you have a chance to fight another day.
That is perhaps our choice this year. Suicide, or live to fight another day.
Romney will just be another Bush. Did we not learn anything from his time in office? Obviously not.
I learned that Gore/Kerry were much, much more dangerous choices. I’ve also observed that complaining about bad candidates every four years, then doing little or nothing to change the party in the interum is lazy.
Btw, good luck feeding that crocodile. If you’re lucky, it will bite everyone else, before it gets to you.
I dont like saying this but here goes,the answer is usually(not always) the simplest and just may be the case involving the family.I have met people(my own mother(Shes a commie)that just cant get it.
We really do not know what his position on abortion is. He is a politician, and not a true Christian, so what he said and what he has done in the past may have been him bending his beliefs to get along politically. Also, his beliefs seem to have been slowly evolving towards pro life. He may have changed his mind. Why not give him the benefit of the doubt. It could be that if he is President and not politically hampered by a very Democratic state that his true heart is pro life. He says that he is pretty pro life. We know that Obama is rabidly for death. There is no question or room to wonder where he is at. We know that he squarely in Satan's corner of death.
I don't exactly trust that Romney will be pro life, but I certainly have more room to hope that he is, and have not even a shred of hope concerning Obama. Romney is who the Republican candidate is right now, and we need to deal in the reality of this fact. Because he has declared himself pro life (Except for rape, incest or life of the mother, I believe, which I completely do not go along with.) he would likely be very much easier to work with concerning laws to protect babies in the womb, and out of the womb, than the one who has proven himself an unrepentant monster.
To see that his view about life may have been evolving towards pro life for a while go to http://2012.republican-candidates.org/Romney/Abortion.php .
Also, Romney is a devout Mormom (Which, yes, is a cult.) and has always said that he was personally against abortion, but didn't want to impose his religious beliefs on others. At least, as a devout Mormom, his own personal beliefs have not been for abortion. This is where he claims to have changed his thinking, and he now thinks that it should be left up to States. According to the Mormom site:
In 1973, the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints released the following statement regarding abortion, which is still applicable today:
The Church opposes abortion and counsels its members not to submit to or perform an abortion except in the rare cases where, in the opinion of competent medical counsel, the life or good health of the mother is seriously endangered or where the pregnancy was caused by rape and produces serious emotional trauma in the mother. Even then it should be done only after counseling with the local presiding priesthood authority and after receiving divine confirmation through prayer.
August 27, 2012 CBS interview
PELLEY: Well, the platform as written at this convention for the Republicans does not allow for exceptions on abortion with regard to the health of the mother or rape or incest. Is that where you are?
ROMNEY: No. My position has been clear throughout this campaign. Im in favor of abortion being legal in the case of rape and incest, and the health and life of the mother.