A few thoughts on the end of the campaign — and the beginning of a big challenge

posted at 8:01 am on November 7, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

In the final couple of weeks of the presidential campaign, we had a big debate over the nature of the American electorate, played out through polling criticism on both sides of the political divide. This came down to fundamental assumptions about which election cycle proved to be a realignment, and which turned out to be the anomaly.  Many conservatives — myself among them, to be sure — operated on the assumption that the 2008 election had been the anomaly, driven by the fiscal crisis, and corrected in the 2010 midterm elections.  The Left assumed that the fiscal crisis in 2008 had realigned the electorate toward greater government interventionism, and that the 2010 cycle was the anomaly, driven by a partisan fight over health care and the lack of a presidential contender at the top of the ticket.

Clearly, conservatives lost that argument last night, at least in large part, as John Ziegler wrote in the immediate aftermath.  That was borne out by the final calculation in the exit polling as well as the vote itself.  The partisan split in the electorate was 38/32/29, nearly identical to 2008.  We argued that Barack Obama and Democrats couldn’t win a base turnout election again, but they did, as evidenced by Mitt Romney’s five-point win among independents, 50/45.  Romney even lowered the gender gap from an Obama +14 in 2008 to Obama +4 in 2012, but that clearly wasn’t enough to overcome what now looks to be a significant realignment four years ago towards Democrats and not an anomaly.

This time, Republicans can’t blame the candidate, or at least they shouldn’t.  Mitt Romney ran one of the most well-organized national campaigns in recent memory within the GOP.  He raised prodigious amounts of cash, keeping pace with Obama.  The RNC followed suit, building a massive and impressive GOTV effort that really did produce a big increase in turnout — but not enough to match what Democrats did in this cycle.  Republicans blamed John McCain in 2008 and even George Bush for the bailouts, but those fig leaves are gone, and the realignment is too apparent to ignore.

That reality presents a challenge to the GOP and to conservatives.  We do not need to change our values, but we do need to find ways to communicate them in an engaging and welcoming manner.  We need to think creatively about big issues, philosophy, and how we can relate conservative values to the needs of a wider range of voters.  Conservatism cannot become constrictionism, or the realignment will continue, and it will become ever more difficult to win national elections.

This will require a new set of national leaders for the Republican Party and conservatism.  We need men and women who can think creatively, produce a positive agenda that isn’t defined by an oppositional nature, and who can eloquently communicate that agenda and the values that drive it.  That should be our focus over the next two years before we start thinking about who to nominate as the party’s presidential nominee — and if done properly, that process will naturally produce the right leader for conservatism.  And if that is done properly, too, perhaps we’ll be in position for another realignment four years from now.

Update: Some readers feel I owe them an apology for “misleading” them about polling over the last few months.  I kind of assumed that this post served as a mea culpa for getting it wrong by explaining why it happened.  Very obviously, I misread the shift in the electorate.  I wasn’t the only one who did so, but I did, and I do apologize for getting it wrong.  However, I didn’t set out to mislead anyone.  What I wrote was my honest opinion about how the polls were based on assumptions of the electorate with which I disagreed — and I’ll note that I linked to the source data every time, and that readers were certainly free to draw their own conclusions.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 7 8 9 10 11 12

Are people honestly trying to say Obama caused the 2008 stock market crash? Not the complete meltdown of the financial system and bankruptcies of large investment banks and insurance companies? Is that really a conservative talking point?

Grasping at straws.

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Are you really going to say that the market is up since Obama came into office because of his actual policies/rhetoric, and not just a regression to the mean after an unprecedented decline?

Good Solid B-Plus on November 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM

Boehner will sell the land. To Hades with him and his.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM

And those so called conservatives who did not vote for ROmney are the ones to blame for this. They are braindead morons, when it mattered most they sat home and let the country go to ruin.

I despise these Ron Paul types more than the left…..btw I saw RuPaul on a CNN interview yesterday. He said he wouldn’t support romney and that there’s little differece between the two. RuPaul is an utter disgrace who’s accomplished nothing but a bunch of racist newsletters along with blaming America first!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 12:04 PM

You poor baby. You think you are entitled to other people’s votes and they said no. Welcome to capitalism in the political realm.

YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO OTHER PEOPLES’ VOTES.

If continue to insist that you are entitled to them, please explain the mechanism for extracting those votes.

The fact is Romney did not earn the votes. He lost. I guess the whole pick someone close to the same ideology as the other party did not turn out the way you thought it would. There are consequences for actions. The consequences for picking Romney was to alienate conservatives, who generally would be amenable to the republican party when it is reasonably conservative. I guess they are not in the mood to reward bad behavior.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:10 PM

If Romney lost more votes than McCain it’s because of three things.

Obama consolidated women and hispanics

(Scorched Earth on Immigration and Lady Parts)

The Media

Free Stuff

workingclass artist on November 7, 2012 at 12:11 PM

The issue is how they are helped and to what purpose and result.

When Government replaces traditional charities they encourage dependence to consolidate an electoral advantage.

It is in the interests of statists to keep whole regions in economic ghettos and undermine cultural and diverse religious bonds in communities to balkanize regions and people.

Traditional Church charities help people get back on their feet so that they don’t become dependent. The help is not just temporary monetary assistance but more holistic to encourage the family and community bonds.

workingclass artist on November 7, 2012 at 11:58 AM

I absolutely agree with you. Obamacare and things like the contraception mandate are designed to dismantle private charities, (so are the Democrat efforts to eliminate charitable contributions). I would like to see the government out this business altogether. But I think the point is that for bad or for worse it seems that half the population currently depends on them to one degree or another and, from a political standpoint, it might not be helpful to come across as denigrating those who are. I think conservative politicians need to become good at making the point you are making and selling policies that will result in the transition from government dependency to self-reliance.

neuquenguy on November 7, 2012 at 12:12 PM

It’s not about us, it’s about them. When we get to the point where we will lie, cheat and steal to win an election that’s when we will prevail (of course we will never do that). When we have the media on our side to cover up our mistakes, to sugar coat and lie about our policies and act as just another branch of our party, we will win. We don’t need to worry about OUR ethics, we just need to find a way to overcome the extreme bias in the media. Until then, no matter who we put forth as a candidate, the liberal media will just crucify them and twist everything they say. We need an all out war (figuratively speaking) to once and for all put the mainstream press in their place. Until that happens, I don’t see much hope for our party.

bandutski on November 7, 2012 at 12:12 PM

If Romney lost more votes than McCain it’s because of three things.

Obama consolidated women and hispanics

(Scorched Earth on Immigration and Lady Parts)

The Media

Free Stuff

workingclass artist on November 7, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Romney closed the woman gap some. So that was not one.

He also increased the share of independents.

He alienated conservatives. Republican turnout was lower.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Romney’s lost the popular vote by more than 2%:

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/results (sorry for the Huff link; that’s where I found it)

Even if that’s slightly off, it shows that Gallup and Ras were wrong by three percentage points. Not good.

bobs1196 on November 7, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Yes, and why? That’s what I want to know.

Alana on November 7, 2012 at 12:15 PM

In reading these post-mortem comments on an election that I and many others thought that Mitt Romney had in the bag (judging by the mood among Dems and the look on Obama’s face yesterday afternoon, we weren’t the only ones surprised), I see a lot of hand-wringing and deep soul-searching and despair over the country’s future. But looking at the only solid and reliable figures we have–the vote totals–we maybe can see through to the root of the calamity.

1. There were 12 million fewer voters than in the previous general election in 2008. Strange result if this was some kind of GOTV victory of a new majority Democratic Base.

2. Obama got about 9.5 million votes less than in 2008; Romney got about 2.5 million votes less than McCain got in 2008. If Romney yesterday had matched McCain or very slightly surpassed the Rep. 2008 totals in a few states he would be President-elect today. He didn’t and so he isn’t.

What conclusions can be drawn from this?

spiritof61 on November 7, 2012 at 12:17 PM

I don’t see how Romney could have campaigned any better. Except maybe that he tried to be a little too “safe”, and the rather blah VP pick of Ryan.

Basically he tried to make this as much of a anti-2008 McCain non-maverick style of campaign as possible. He tried to run on intellectualism and not emotions. And ended up not inspiring much support from anyone.

tkyang99 on November 7, 2012 at 12:17 PM


If you look at the number of voters in a particular way, it should offer us an opportunity, if we but have the brains, guts and heart to take it. Take down the media…we have been doing so in print…and tv dropping too. The viewership for ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS is paltry compared to the more than 57 million Americans that voted for Romney. The biggest viewership was on NBC for the debate and that was only 12,391,000. But what is interesting for us is that Fox News, a cable station, garnered 11,474,000 million viewers also….imagine for a moment what 12 million of us could do to the “commercial” stations…and how we could launch Fox into the stratophere. Nothing hurts like the bottom line getting less and less and less. If we don’t watch the commercial stations (which, belong to you and me anyway), what do you suppose their advertisers will do? But, it has been my experience for decades that most people who start movements or organizations to help left or right, end up doing it because it makes them money….not that they don’t care, or want things different, just that it becomes a bit less important because of money of power. Anyway, just my thoughts. What I do know is that the majority of Americans are decent folk. We don’t spew hate like the Left. We don’t lie like the Left. And we take care of those in need….government can’t! But, if we don’t take some control in the next three years, then we will be faced with over 50% takers. So, are you a taker or a worker…that will make the difference!

sharinlite on November 7, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Are people honestly trying to say Obama caused the 2008 stock market crash? Not the complete meltdown of the financial system and bankruptcies of large investment banks and insurance companies? Is that really a conservative talking point?

Grasping at straws.

If the Dow going down 300 points today is being pinned on Obama, I think we can all agree that any investor is better off with it up 4,500 points while he has been in office.

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 12:02 PM

In 2008, the market had stabilised in October after selling off hard in September. In the two weeks immediately following Obama’s election, the market tanked 25%.

Since then, the market has gone up on a massive float from the Fed and it has been on very low market volume. It’s all fake, inflated dollars going up in the face of a near-recessionary GDP.

Django on November 7, 2012 at 12:21 PM

This will require a new set of national leaders for the Republican Party and conservatism. We need men and women who can think creatively, produce a positive agenda that isn’t defined by an oppositional nature, and who can eloquently communicate that agenda and the values that drive it. That should be our focus over the next two years before we start thinking about who to nominate as the party’s presidential nominee — and if done properly, that process will naturally produce the right leader for conservatism. And if that is done properly, too, perhaps we’ll be in position for another realignment four years from now.

That won’t matter unless the GOP and conservatives take back control some of the MSM and major networks, or crush them, or we find a way to bypass them.

Romney lost because he was not just trying to beat Obama, but an entire MSM / Entertainment Industry. They are going to label every Republican as a racist, a sexist, a bigot, a war monger, a heartless vulture, and any other name to scare off just enough of those independents and women to pull off elections like this again and again. They also can keep minorities in line by scaring the hell out of them.

It is not just the news, but the TV shows, the movies, the music industry, etc. Entertainment is being used to indoctrinate the population. We have hurt that industry somehow, perhaps an organized and aggressive boycott against all the entertainers who supported Obama. We are going to have to be like the leftist if we want to beat the leftist. It is gutter warfare…and need to be prepared for it.

William Eaton on November 7, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Stop the non-sense about Obama GOTV being the determinant factor. His vote total sank by over 10% despite having a huge organization and the incumbancy advantage.

Why did some many Rs that voted in 2008 stay home in 2012? That is the only real question to ask.

Norwegian on November 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Are you really going to say that the market is up since Obama came into office because of his actual policies/rhetoric, and not just a regression to the mean after an unprecedented decline?

Good Solid B-Plus on November 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM

I wasn’t planning on giving Obama any credit for the stock market when I woke up today, but if people are going to say he is causing today’s drop in the Dow and he caused the 2008 drop (which is an insane assertion, btw) then I think he should get full credit for what has happened while he has been in office.
If we want to take the stock market off the table and say that we should be looking elsewhere to grade Obama, hey, I am fine with that. But you can’t say he caused today’s drop, he caused 2008′s crash, and then give him no credit for what has happened in between. That defies logic.

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Rush just nailed it. We.Are.Outnumbered.

Rockshine on November 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Why did some many Rs that voted in 2008 stay home in 2012? That is the only real question to ask.

Norwegian on November 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Systemic fraud where a vote for Romney on a computer tallied as a vote for Obama.

Romney alienated conservative voters who decided to stay home.

The state I am currently in, the 4/5 of conservatives in my office who stayed home would not have made any difference, this state went for Romney, as did my home state where I voted for Romney and the down ticket Republicans. But it points towards the Romney alienated conservative voters.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM

tommyhawk on November 7, 2012 at 11:25 AM

DO you have a job? If so the taxman cometh and this time he’s in charge of healthcare too. Trust me on this one, I worked for them. It ain’t going to be pretty for you.

Deanna on November 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Rush just nailed it. We.Are.Outnumbered.

Rockshine on November 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Not according to the partisan registration numbers.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM

All those who say that we lost because Romney was a liberal/RINO/not-conservative-enough are wrong. All those who say, “If we had nominated Mr. X, instead of Romney, we would have won,” are wrong.

This is my opinion–I can’t prove I’m right. Neither can you prove that you are right.

But, consider this: I posit that Romney lost NOT because conservatives stayed home (look at all of you who said that you held your nose and voted for Romney), BUT because more citizens voted FOR Obama.

Even the most ABR amongst us must admit that Romney is at least slightly more conservative than Obama.

So, what happened is that the American people voted for socialism.

A more conservative candidate than Romney would have gotten less votes–not more.

Just my opinion.

RedCrow on November 7, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Rush just nailed it. We.Are.Outnumbered.

Rockshine on November 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

But we are not. See the vote tallies in my comment above, available anywhere.

spiritof61 on November 7, 2012 at 12:28 PM

1. There were 12 million fewer voters than in the previous general election in 2008. Strange result if this was some kind of GOTV victory of a new majority Democratic Base.

2. Obama got about 9.5 million votes less than in 2008; Romney got about 2.5 million votes less than McCain got in 2008. If Romney yesterday had matched McCain or very slightly surpassed the Rep. 2008 totals in a few states he would be President-elect today. He didn’t and so he isn’t.

What conclusions can be drawn from this?

spiritof61 on November 7, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Yeah, I find that very surprising since all polling and anecdotal evidence suggested Republicans would be very enthusiastic about this election. What is the death rate in this country? Did 2.5 million older Republicans pass away? Perhaps, contrary to polling, the number of Republicans in this country is actually decreasing?

RobbBond on November 7, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Romney alienated conservative voters who decided to stay home.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Any “conservative” who is “alienated” by a guy like Romney when we’re staring down the barrel of 4 more years of Obama is too much of an idiotic basket case to comprehend anything at all.

Django on November 7, 2012 at 12:29 PM

In 2008, the market had stabilised in October after selling off hard in September. In the two weeks immediately following Obama’s election, the market tanked 25%.

Since then, the market has gone up on a massive float from the Fed and it has been on very low market volume. It’s all fake, inflated dollars going up in the face of a near-recessionary GDP.

Django on November 7, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Not true. It went down 12.5% (from 9,625.28 on 11/4/08 to 8,424,75 on 11/18/08). So, let’s start with your numbers. It’s still up 3,300 points (35%) since he took office.

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Rush nailed it as usual in his monologue.

I took notes and here they are:

Rush 07Nov12:

It’s hard to beat Santa Claus. Says Romney had his flaws but would’ve been a fine president, would’ve been great for the country. Bottom line is Romney presented a platform of traditional America where hard work leads to success. He gave a vision of traditional America.

The option was hard work vs. success. Obama countered with a War on Women, binders, and big bird.
Amazingly Romney got 2.5 million LESS votes than MCCAIN! Obama had 10 million less votes than 08 (overall in 2012 it was 50 – 48).

EXIT POLLS:
(Rush thought they were BS at first). Many said they were impressed by obama’s response to Hurricane Sandy (amazing!! All he did was show up for an hour and a half and bear hug Christie)! Many thought Romney would only help rich and hurt the middle class (the truth is it’s exactly the opposite)! Now for the first time ever (never seen any polls ever saying this ) > 50% like obamacare and want it expanded! Many trust Obama more in an international crisis!! Obama attracted minorities and women.
Many still blamed Bush for the economy!!!!

Rush: Romney argued for free markets, but not the majority now thinks the deck is stacked against them and that we need big gov’t to help!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 12:30 PM

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 12:02 PM

About the most fortuitous thing that Bush bequeathed dear leader was a market bottom so that you could make your ridiculous claims that this idiot had anything to do with market growth. By the way, the bottom of the market fell around Oct 1, 2008. Pretty close to the election and by all accounts increasingly likely win for dear leader by that date. Investors were spooked by him.

Do you think that sidelined capital will now flow freely into the US markets? The trillions that corporations are sitting on will now be expatriated. Dear leader will own this capital flight.

Meanwhile, we increase our indebtedness to those overseas who will/do control us.

I know these are pathetic arguments and talking points, but then again, I’m in a fog of disgust and disbelief and regret that I couldn’t do anything to affect a different outcome. I’m powerless. But so are you.

freedomfirst on November 7, 2012 at 12:30 PM

I guess they are not in the mood to reward bad behavior.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:10 PM

They did. They allowed Obama to be re-elected. But you knew that and don’t care. Have a nice day.

Deanna on November 7, 2012 at 12:31 PM

RedCrow on November 7, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Vote totals do not fit the facts. Republican registration is up, Independent registration is up and Romney won independents, Democrat registration is down. Yet Romney got fewer votes than McCain.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Right now I am feeling very hopeless and abandoned by God. We probably deserve it since so many Americans have abandoned Him. My husband has been unemployed for 2 1/2 yrs, and I was SO hoping for an economic turn around. Guess that won’t be happening any time soon. I feel utterly defeated and for the first time in my adult life, totally ashamed of half of the country. I believe we have seen the death of America as we knew it………..(sigh)

Sasha List on November 7, 2012 at 11:20 AM

You have been seeing that since the 60s.

Last night you just saw a very big nail.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 12:33 PM

They did. They allowed Obama to be re-elected. But you knew that and don’t care. Have a nice day.

Deanna on November 7, 2012 at 12:31 PM

If they had power over the Democrat party, you would be correct. Instead, where they do wield power, they chose to withhold their votes and in so doing punish the Republican party for failing to offer them something to vote for.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Do we have consensus here that expected/likely R voters in the election did not vote R? The depressed D vote we can understand given the candidate and the pitiful Obama campaign.

spiritof61 on November 7, 2012 at 12:34 PM

neuquenguy on November 7, 2012 at 11:52 AM

For promoting handouts from the gov’t on 30K teacher mind/income.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Vote totals do not fit the facts. Republican registration is up, Independent registration is up and Romney won independents, Democrat registration is down. Yet Romney got fewer votes than McCain.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Maybe the NorthEast, Hurricane Sandy, affected republicans stayed home. That is what the article on Drudge said (that voters in NY stayed home). We need to see the state by state breakdown to know if these differences contributed to his loss.

cep on November 7, 2012 at 12:35 PM

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:33 PM

May you and yours, the brainless Rs/Ds all be punished with utter destruction by Obama and his looters. He uses all of you well and good for him and his.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 12:36 PM

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Many things affect the market on a ‘moment in time’ basis (significant events) or an ‘over time’ basis.

They are different.

It is not illogical to say both that today’s decline is because of the election, and that the previous increase was *in spite* of Obama’s policies, not because of them. Just like the increase in drilling and oil production was *in spite* of Obama, not to his credit.

If you want to assert that the increase was *because* of anything he did, feel free to back it up. In the meantime, the real world can point to a great many things he’s done to *hamper* the economy and the market, which continues – as markets do – to do it’s damn level best *in spite* of the overtly destructive behavior of nitwits in DC.

Midas on November 7, 2012 at 12:36 PM

About the most fortuitous thing that Bush bequeathed dear leader was a market bottom so that you could make your ridiculous claims that this idiot had anything to do with market growth. By the way, the bottom of the market fell around Oct 1, 2008. Pretty close to the election and by all accounts increasingly likely win for dear leader by that date. Investors were spooked by him.

freedomfirst on November 7, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Dow Jones was at 10,831.07 on 10/1/2008. No where near the bottom. Do you think I don’t have access to this data? Where try to put these lies past me?

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Thanks, Ed for this article. It cheered me up a little bit. But we still have to wave the red flag, dammit!!

Who is John Galt on November 7, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Not true. It went down 12.5% (from 9,625.28 on 11/4/08 to 8,424,75 on 11/18/08). So, let’s start with your numbers. It’s still up 3,300 points (35%) since he took office.

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 12:30 PM

You’re making the mistake of looking at the Dow Jones Industrial Average, not the S&P 500 which is the professionals’ measure of US equity markets. The Dow is a “retail” average that only tracks 30 stocks.

The S&P 500 was at a little over 1,000 on 11/4/2008. After four years, it’s now at 1397 thanks to the Fed on very low volume and that’s not really much of a move in 4 years. The volume is key because it’s much easier to move prices on low volume. And these prices have been moved by the Fed’s inflationary dollars.

Django on November 7, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Do we have consensus here that expected/likely R voters in the election did not vote R? The depressed D vote we can understand given the candidate and the pitiful Obama campaign.

spiritof61 on November 7, 2012 at 12:34 PM

A few things …

What’s the source of that information indicating increased R registration? I’m not necessarily doubting you. I’ve heard the same thing. But, I honestly find it very shocking that less would vote for Romney than McCain. For all his faults (and he had many) Romney presented a much clearer vision than McCain ever did.

I think that some people make the mistake of thinking that if they just elect a more socially “conservative” (Santorum) candidate then all those R’s would come out in full force. There are many different reasons that people choose to be Republican, and my personal feeling is that it’s increasingly due to fiscal as opposed to social matters.

RobbBond on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Vote totals do not fit the facts. Republican registration is up, Independent registration is up and Romney won independents, Democrat registration is down. Yet Romney got fewer votes than McCain.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:31 PM

I don’t understand that either.
But, I was wringing my hands about democrat voter fraud for over a year. (Many years, actually.)

I don’t see that changing. See, Philly GOP election observers, polls open for hours after close, etc.

So, what are we to do? Hate to say it, but the only non-violent path I see is to somehow split the country. (And, that ain’t gonna happen, either.)

RedCrow on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 PM

They did. They allowed Obama to be re-elected. But you knew that and don’t care. Have a nice day.

Deanna on November 7, 2012 at 12:31 PM

You are sort of right, my level of care is minimal. I have watched people on Hot Air try to shove Romney down our throats since October of 2011. Romney would not have been a great savior, better than Obama sure, Hillary Clinton would be better than Obama, not a high hurdle to make. The only difference is of degree of decline. Romney would have made it go maybe 8 to 12 years, Obama, 6 months to 8 years.

It is not a good day for me though. I had fully expected the rest of the population to do like I did. Bite the bullet to avoid the bullet and vote Romney. I guess my bitter and extremely poor view of Americans was once again far too high of praise for them in reality.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:41 PM

tommyhawk on November 7, 2012 at 11:47 AM

polesucker…

Too bad your “rightwing” countrymen are too well behave to call you names.. I’m not.

47-55% of Americans are vermin… you are one of them, Romney in his righteous stupidity was right for once.

Guess what.. the more of welfare leaches are registered, the faster the system will collapse … oh my Piven!

Rookie on November 7, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Dow Jones was at 10,831.07 on 10/1/2008. No where near the bottom. Do you think I don’t have access to this data? Where try to put these lies past me?

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 12:37 PM

The S&P 500 bottomed out on March 6, 2009, at 666. And no, I’m not kidding about that number.

Django on November 7, 2012 at 12:41 PM

I don’t understand that either.
But, I was wringing my hands about democrat voter fraud for over a year. (Many years, actually.)

I don’t see that changing. See, Philly GOP election observers, polls open for hours after close, etc.

So, what are we to do? Hate to say it, but the only non-violent path I see is to somehow split the country. (And, that ain’t gonna happen, either.)

RedCrow on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 PM

I think both parties are in on the scam. Keeping the citizens in need of help empowers government and destroys liberty.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:42 PM

1. There were 12 million fewer voters than in the previous general election in 2008. Strange result if this was some kind of GOTV victory of a new majority Democratic Base.

2. Obama got about 9.5 million votes less than in 2008; Romney got about 2.5 million votes less than McCain got in 2008. If Romney yesterday had matched McCain or very slightly surpassed the Rep. 2008 totals in a few states he would be President-elect today. He didn’t and so he isn’t.

What conclusions can be drawn from this?

spiritof61 on November 7, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Yeah, I find that very surprising since all polling and anecdotal evidence suggested Republicans would be very enthusiastic about this election. What is the death rate in this country? Did 2.5 million older Republicans pass away? Perhaps, contrary to polling, the number of Republicans in this country is actually decreasing?

RobbBond on November 7, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Or are there too many Ron Paul types out there who refused to vote for romney??

I truly hate Ron Paul!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 12:43 PM

We lost because Obamacare was off the table. OCare was why the TEA party thrived. Once the issue was abandoned a lot of the energy in the RW base was diminished.

Romney ran a good campaign but not being able to attack OCare was too big a handicap. The ABRs were right.

THE BASE WAS THE KEY NOT THE INDEPENDENTS.

Never fall for the moderate’s losing argument about indies again!

BoxHead1 on November 7, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 12:33 PM

I saw the liberal’s response to my comment last night. (You replied to it several times. I had had enough and went to bed.)

Funny how, after all of the left’s vitriol during this election (e.g. accusing Romney of killing a woman with cancer, just one of many), we’re now supposed to “work together.”

Nope. The good ol’ USA is headed down the toilet. Maybe we should be hoping to expedite its demise?

RedCrow on November 7, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Why did some many Rs that voted in 2008 stay home in 2012? That is the only real question to ask.

Norwegian on November 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

This just makes no sense whatsoever. Frankly, it seems utterly impossible that Romney got fewer votes than McCain.

There was a tangible “crawl over broken glass” to vote aspect here that was not present for McCain; Romney should’ve gotten *every* McCain vote, *plus* the ones that stayed home in 2008 cause they didn’t like McCain, *plus* the disaffected Obama voters who changed their minds, *plus* the greater number of independents that swung to Romney…

Something’s very ugly and wrong here.

Midas on November 7, 2012 at 12:45 PM

3. Sandy Sandy/Christie swayed some independents.
SAZMD on November 7, 2012 at 8:03 AM

Thought that needed a correction

The Left assumed that the fiscal crisis in 2008 had realigned the electorate toward greater government interventionism, and that the 2010 cycle was the anomaly, driven by a partisan fight over health care and the lack of a presidential contender at the top of the ticket.

The 2012 cycle was to elect a national leader. Different goals. The great redistributionist Obama won re election in an economy that is declared to be recovering, even though everyone is suffering as bad or worse than in 2008, due to gas prices, inflation, and a painful, frightening jobs crisis. He also granted amnesty to 1 million, and promised amnesty to everyone who can make it across the border, only if he gets re elected

There is an unspoken but understood point that if Obama gets elected, amnesty brings in more voters to protect redistribution, and that also pushes the vote

The more Obama and his crowd lied about the economy being good, the more public fear increased, as if each person feared they were being left off the gravy train. That pushed them faster to Obama. Divide and conquer, using the empty soup bowl. The hurricane gave him a boost too not because Obama did a great job, but because the scared ones felt the cold water too

Everyone knows for certain that Obama will print more money, hand out more phones and squeeze the rich. (a family member, who is in Obama’s ‘rich’ category, rages about the evil blood sucking rich, while living in a million dollar house, and with an extended family under the roof who have cost the taxpayers a bunch of bucks just from jail time, court appearances, and probation officers)

In retrospect, it required having control of the media to rebuild the image of America sufficiently to guide the sheep into the corral.

Soros has not lost his touch.

This was about manipulating perceptions to people who are maintained in a virtual news blackout

The Founders recognized that liberty cannot prevail unless a population is moral, and Tocqueville predicted the American model would fail when the populace learned to vote themselves money by taxation

This will require a new set of national leaders for the Republican Party and conservatism. We need men and women who can think creatively, produce a positive agenda that isn’t defined by an oppositional nature, and who can eloquently communicate that agenda and the values that drive it.

The GOP spends it’s time fighting conservatives. This will not change. Conservatives cannot morph to progressivism. Fifty percent of the public has bought the redistributionist agenda. It takes a Thatcher to break the hypnosis, and a Thatcher is eventually crushed by her own,

The real problem is religion (lack of), which instills values, and education, which creates a shared culture. Religion has a demographic advantage, but education is owned by the left. Now one half the populace follows the counter culture, and a part of the other half wants an Obamaphone

entagor on November 7, 2012 at 12:45 PM

neuquenguy on November 7, 2012 at 11:52 AM

For promoting handouts from the gov’t on 30K teacher mind/income.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Wasn’t promoting them, I wish they didn’t exist. But I personally know someone who worked very hard all his life and made 6 figures most of his life until he lost his job during the internet bubble. He re-trained and became a teacher making under 30K with a large family. He is a staunch conservative and hated it but had to relay on food stamps to complement his earnings. I know he felt denigrated by the way people like Rush sometimes talks about people on food stamps (I am Rush fan by the way). All I am saying is that some politicians could be a little more careful in how they come across when discussing the subject. Conservatives have the right principles, it is not the role of the government (nor can we afford it) to support the taker lifestyle. But people on government assistance is a reality that exists and it is going to exist for a long time until we get it fixed.

neuquenguy on November 7, 2012 at 12:46 PM

(Rush thought they were BS at first). Many said they were impressed by obama’s response to Hurricane Sandy (amazing!! All he did was show up for an hour and a half and bear hug Christie)! Many thought Romney would only help rich and hurt the middle class (the truth is it’s exactly the opposite)! Now for the first time ever (never seen any polls ever saying this ) > 50% like obamacare and want it expanded! Many trust Obama more in an international crisis!! Obama attracted minorities and women.
Many still blamed Bush for the economy!!!!

Rush: Romney argued for free markets, but not the majority now thinks the deck is stacked against them and that we need big gov’t to help!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Well this is all easy to understand…

It is called the MSM and Entertainment Industry…aka “Progressive Propaganda Machine”.

When non-informed voters are bombarded with messages each day about how the Republicans are basically sexist, racist, greedy vultures and that capitalism is evil what do you expect. We are not losing the truth, we are losing the propaganda war, the information war…

We have to change that and we can if we have the guts to organize and fight. The days of conservatives are too good for boycotts and “character assassinations” are over. We need to paint this not as a war between capitalism and socialism, but as a war between individual liberty and fascism. Most Americans like individual liberty, even though they don’t realize that by voting Obama in they are losing it, and hate control freaks, statists and fascist.

William Eaton on November 7, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Or are there too many Ron Paul types out there who refused to vote for romney??

I truly hate Ron Paul!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Kind of an irrational hatred if you ask me. What if they supported Santorum and refused to vote for Romney? Gingrich? Do you hate all of them as well? People have legitimate reasons for supporting various candidates. If you’re trying to win them over to your side, constantly disparaging them is probably not a good idea.

RobbBond on November 7, 2012 at 12:47 PM

May you and yours, the brainless Rs/Ds all be punished with utter destruction by Obama and his looters. He uses all of you well and good for him and his.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Poor baby. You too are entitled to other people’s vote? Guess we are a slave nation after all. Children owe money to the old for no reason, and voters owe you their vote for no reason.

I voted for Romney by the way jerk. Not that it mattered, my home state is very red still. +8.

I’ll probably be taking some contracts outside of the country soon. Engineers are needed everywhere, except maybe Africa…

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:48 PM

All that’s left is the zombie apocalypse. We’ll be the survivors.

exliberal on November 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Any “conservative” who is “alienated” by a guy like Romney when we’re staring down the barrel of 4 more years of Obama is too much of an idiotic basket case to comprehend anything at all.

Django on November 7, 2012 at 12:29 PM

^^^^^ this

DarkCurrent on November 7, 2012 at 12:50 PM

As long as major urban areas remain Dem strongholds by promising handouts, the odds are stacked against Republicans/Conservatives. Forget the divisiveness of aiming for women, minorities, youth, and the other identity groups that Dems pander to.

The Republicans should flood cities with positive messages and possibly programs (supported by anecdotes of successful endeavors) that show (not tell) that economic growth comes from a hand-up, not a handout. The message should be emphatic that the successful “DID build that,” that they improved their neighborhoods/communities, that their children have opportunities, and so forth.

onlineanalyst on November 7, 2012 at 12:51 PM

You poor baby. You think you are entitled to other people’s votes and they said no. Welcome to capitalism in the political realm.

YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO OTHER PEOPLES’ VOTES.

If continue to insist that you are entitled to them, please explain the mechanism for extracting those votes.

The fact is Romney did not earn the votes. He lost. I guess the whole pick someone close to the same ideology as the other party did not turn out the way you thought it would. There are consequences for actions. The consequences for picking Romney was to alienate conservatives, who generally would be amenable to the republican party when it is reasonably conservative. I guess they are not in the mood to reward bad behavior.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:10 PM

Let me educate you:

Romney presented the traditional view of America. Hard work and the free market which results in success. The bottom line is too many parasites out there rejected that.

ROmney had alot of flows but he was not a marxist and offered a platform for capitalism and hard work.

For those conservatives who didn’t support Romney they are the lowest of the low. I have ZERO respect for them. They are morons and need to share the blame with the parasites for the disasters awaiting us in the next 4 years.

Look at how this country was founded. All those who fought for our freedom and sacrificed their lives. Look at the greatest generation in WWII. Now you have a bunch of parasites wanting free stuff and Ron Paul losers who stayed at home sucking their thumbs!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 12:51 PM

I think both parties are in on the scam. Keeping the citizens in need of help empowers government and destroys liberty.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Well…I have never doubted that their are R’s who are only in it for their own enrichment (as well as D’s). This has always been. It is human nature. (Don’t know, or can’t remember your religious beliefs; but, Jesus was the only true altruist.)

But, the Romney (and Ryan) campaign did make it clear that we are on the brink of economic disaster. The Obama administration and his campaign have entirely ignored our pending fiscal ruin.

Whatever the explanation is on the vote count, this election should not have been close. Our fellow citizens voted FOR RUIN.

RedCrow on November 7, 2012 at 12:53 PM

May you and yours, the brainless Rs/Ds all be punished with utter destruction by Obama and his looters. He uses all of you well and good for him and his.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 12:36 PM

My thoughts exactly !!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 12:55 PM

What’s the source of that information indicating increased R registration? I’m not necessarily doubting you. I’ve heard the same thing. But, I honestly find it very shocking that less would vote for Romney than McCain. For all his faults (and he had many) Romney presented a much clearer vision than McCain ever did.

RobbBond on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 PM

My source would be the Rasmussen and other polls of likely voter self-identification posted here over the last month or so, especially with regard to Datechguy’s blog postings which gave full weight to at least parity between the parties. Exit polling yesterday seems to have been D+6, a result routinely derided by one and all for a long time.

spiritof61 on November 7, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Why did some many Rs that voted in 2008 stay home in 2012? That is the only real question to ask.

Norwegian on November 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

1 after yelling about the dangers of OCare for 3 years they dropped the issue (because of the nominee). OCare was the issue to attack O on – Unpopular , tangible and frightening.

2. the confused Benghazi response and Christie’s late endorsement was the last nail in the coffin.

3. we begged for dizzy indies instead of appealing to our natural constituency.

BoxHead1 on November 7, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Romney presented the traditional view of America. Hard work and the free market which results in success. The bottom line is too many parasites out there rejected that.

ROmney had alot of flows but he was not a marxist and offered a platform for capitalism and hard work.

For those conservatives who didn’t support Romney they are the lowest of the low. I have ZERO respect for them. They are morons and need to share the blame with the parasites for the disasters awaiting us in the next 4 years.

Look at how this country was founded. All those who fought for our freedom and sacrificed their lives. Look at the greatest generation in WWII. Now you have a bunch of parasites wanting free stuff and Ron Paul losers who stayed at home sucking their thumbs!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Actual education:
The day after he offered that view in the debate, his numbers increased dramatically…

Then in the weeks after that, he walked much of it back. Thus, he began the work needed to earn the votes, and then torpedoed himself by veering back to the left where his views are formed.

The people who voted for Romney in the primary are the real failures. Picking Obama light to go up against Obama prime. You brought a bread stick to a gun fight and lost.

They do not OWE YOU THEIR VOTE, you earn is. That is the conservative way. I guess for a progressive loser like yourself the concept of earning something is foreign, everything is OWED TO YOU.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Whatever the explanation is on the vote count, this election should not have been close. Our fellow citizens voted FOR RUIN.

RedCrow on November 7, 2012 at 12:53 PM

I agree. I was dumb founded with the results, even though I detest Romney.

But Romney might have talked about the future fiscal destruction, he was not going to actually fix it, he was going to put a band aid over the already infected wounds.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Kind of an irrational hatred if you ask me. What if they supported Santorum and refused to vote for Romney? Gingrich? Do you hate all of them as well? People have legitimate reasons for supporting various candidates. If you’re trying to win them over to your side, constantly disparaging them is probably not a good idea.

RobbBond on November 7, 2012 at 12:47 PM

I think it’s perfect reasoning.

These people are a major reason we’re ruined as a nation. It was the lack of base support combined with the parasites that did us in.

And yes if it was Santorum or Newt supporters I’d feel exactly the same way towards them. See I fight hard for the best conservatives in the primary. I wanted Sarah and was devasted when she didn’t run. Then I supported Cain, Bachmann, then Santorum. I was very upset when Romney whon the nomination.

Yet I knew that Romney was no Marxist, that he believed in traditional American values and American exceptionalsm. I knew that obama would be a millon times worse in his second term.

As the Great One says I’d vote for an orange juice can over maobama and expected the same of all conservatives.

Of course Santorum and Newt showed alot of class by supporting Romney throughout the campaign. Ron Paul never supported Romney — yesterday on CNN he still refused and said there was little difference between the 2 parties.

We are about to learn the hard way just how wrong Ron Paul is!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Actual education:
The day after he offered that view in the debate, his numbers increased dramatically…

Then in the weeks after that, he walked much of it back. Thus, he began the work needed to earn the votes, and then torpedoed himself by veering back to the left where his views are formed.

The people who voted for Romney in the primary are the real failures. Picking Obama light to go up against Obama prime. You brought a bread stick to a gun fight and lost.

They do not OWE YOU THEIR VOTE, you earn is. That is the conservative way. I guess for a progressive loser like yourself the concept of earning something is foreign, everything is OWED TO YOU.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Very sound points astonerii. Agree that a vote is earned, not owed. As well as I think Romney campaigned and debated, I honestly don’t think a Romney administration would be extremely different than Obama’s. What powers would Romney be willing to give back to the people/states? I honestly don’t believe he would have worked to repeal Obamacare. I don’t believe he would have ended the assassination of US citizens overseas, I think he would have increased military spending and merely slightly decreased the rate of growth of the American budget. Still, of the two I think I wanted Romney to win because he does come across as kind of likeable to me. He seems somewhat genuine and kind. In contrast, Obama comes across as a narcissistic, arrogant a-hole. And, with a Romney administration at least I wouldn’t have to hear that boring class warfare nonsense and cars in ditches that Obama constantly brings up.

RobbBond on November 7, 2012 at 1:03 PM

If we want to take the stock market off the table and say that we should be looking elsewhere to grade Obama, hey, I am fine with that. But you can’t say he caused today’s drop, he caused 2008′s crash, and then give him no credit for what has happened in between. That defies logic.

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

What happened between 2008 and today was the crash in the EU. Their economies tanked. There has been a huge slo-mo run on many banks over there.

Forget interest, one of our larger banks imposed huge fees on large cash deposits from overseas (million dollar deposits) where the depositor wants to be able to remove the money in case the US tanks. As money was drained from the EU a lot of it also entered our market which pumped the numbers

I would even guess money from France (whose new socialist leader jacked top rates) may be jumping out of our market today, to a safer less socialist haven. Money in US banks normally becomes American dollars, and money in American markets follows the dollar as well.

Our dollar has to be discounted today, because Treasury already announced extraordinary measures needed before years end for the debt ceiling

I expect the drain to continue, since Obama cannot account for Obamacare, if nothing else

entagor on November 7, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Does anyone remember a cartoon video that related to a local government expansion in a small town that eventually led to a deficit problem. Ex. one side of town decided that the local park was too far and decided to vote for a new park for their locality and so on…

This expansion of government provided services eventually caused a once-thriving community to go broke.

I would appreciate a link to that video if one has it…thanks!

metroryder on November 7, 2012 at 1:04 PM

They do not OWE YOU THEIR VOTE, you earn is. That is the conservative way. I guess for a progressive loser like yourself the concept of earning something is foreign, everything is OWED TO YOU.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM

It was losers like yourself who refused to get off your lazy a$$ to support ROmney that played a huge factor in ruining this country.

When the time came to fight to save our country you whined about how much it hurt you to have to even vote for Romney… awww poor baby!

Just remember you failed in fighting to stand up to evil and will have to live with it.

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Very sound points astonerii. Agree that a vote is earned, not owed. As well as I think Romney campaigned and debated, I honestly don’t think a Romney administration would be extremely different than Obama’s. What powers would Romney be willing to give back to the people/states? I honestly don’t believe he would have worked to repeal Obamacare. I don’t believe he would have ended the assassination of US citizens overseas, I think he would have increased military spending and merely slightly decreased the rate of growth of the American budget. Still, of the two I think I wanted Romney to win because he does come across as kind of likeable to me. He seems somewhat genuine and kind. In contrast, Obama comes across as a narcissistic, arrogant a-hole. And, with a Romney administration at least I wouldn’t have to hear that boring class warfare nonsense and cars in ditches that Obama constantly brings up.

RobbBond on November 7, 2012 at 1:03 PM

He doesn’t make ANY good points!

Yeah I’m sure Romney would’ve let 4 Americans get killed and not lift a finger to help!

I’m sure he’d smuggle guns to Mexico and do a massive coverup after the death of a border patrol agent and 300 Mexicans.

I’m sure he’d give billions to Solyndra

I’m sure he’d block the Keystone pipeline.

I’m sure he’d let the Bush tax cuts expire

I’m sure he’d make massive defense cuts.

And if he had a GOP senate he WOULD’VE REPEALED OBAMACARE — IT’D BE POLITICIAL SUICIDE NOT TO!!

You’ve been owned!!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 1:08 PM

I agree. I was dumb founded with the results, even though I detest Romney.

But Romney might have talked about the future fiscal destruction, he was not going to actually fix it, he was going to put a band aid over the already infected wounds.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 12:59 PM

I well remember your opinions on Romney. (Though, I think your intent in saying you “detest” him, means his politics. I was pro-Romney just because I thought he had the best chance to win. But, during the campaign I learned a lot about what a great human being he is–something the electorate managed never to learn.)

I think R&R would have at least been a step in the right direction.

I’d agree with you–we don’t need a step, we need(ed) a GIANT LEAP. But, again, whoever that candidate was would not have done as well as Romney, IMO.

And, instead, we’ve assured our fall.

RedCrow on November 7, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Any “conservative” who is “alienated” by a guy like Romney when we’re staring down the barrel of 4 more years of Obama is too much of an idiotic basket case to comprehend anything at all.

Django on November 7, 2012 at 12:29 PM

^^^^^ this

DarkCurrent on November 7, 2012 at 12:50 PM

I SECOND THIS!!!

I’ll never forgive these so called conservatives for not even trying to stop evil!!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 1:10 PM

As for Sandy explaining the nosedive in Dem voters, a little quick research shows that NJ-PA-NY (Sandy targets) voted (president only) 10.3m Democrat/7.0m Republican in 2008; 8.7m D/6.4m R in 2012. Absolute numbers were down therefore by 1.6m for the Dems and .6m for the GOP. Obama’s win percentage for all three states was almost exactly the same for both elections. D votes went down by 16%, R votes by 9%. Remember, over 9m fewer votes were cast for Obama in 2012 than in 2008.

“Sandy” therefore depressed the D vote slightly more with relation to the Rep. vote in the affected states, but not totally out of line with the national figures (D-14% from 2008; R-5% from 2008).

spiritof61 on November 7, 2012 at 1:10 PM

The Republicans should flood cities with positive messages and possibly programs (supported by anecdotes of successful endeavors) that show (not tell) that economic growth comes from a hand-up, not a handout. The message should be emphatic that the successful “DID build that,” that they improved their neighborhoods/communities, that their children have opportunities, and so forth.

onlineanalyst on November 7, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Positive only works if you also supply the negative. We did not go into the American Revolution by just pushing a positive message of breaking away from the King and Britain. Anger motivates people much more than anything historically.

SO Republicans need to keep pushing school choice, which is popular in the minority communities in America, at the same time blame the democrats for why schools that their children go to suck. Blame democrats for high murder rates, blame democrats for high rates of minorities in prison, blame democrats for the machine party politics that have created places like Detroit and hang it around their neck. Do want your city to be the next Detroit, vote Democrat. Do you want you child to be in jail or prison, vote Democrat, etc.

The Republicans offer liberty and freedom for you, a well run efficient government (no more long lines!), and safe streets. The democrats want you to be enslaved to them, a party controlled by white ivy league graduates who only want your vote, not your happiness. They don’t send their kids to the schools you send your kids, they don’t live in your neighborhoods. It is time we use the class warfare tactic against the white progressives who invented it from their plush offices in academia. Obviously we need more minorities (esp. Hispanics) in the GOP in those areas to promote the message. We have to start some where and we need our message to sound revolutionary, not old fashioned.

Someone they can trust, if of course we can rest some media control away from the progressives.

William Eaton on November 7, 2012 at 1:10 PM

I wonder if last night’s results mean that this will create a bigger civil war within the GOP.

That’s the last thing we need right now.

daoster on November 7, 2012 at 1:12 PM

I wonder if last night’s results mean that this will create a bigger civil war within the GOP.

That’s the last thing we need right now.

daoster on November 7, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Wrong. It is the only thing we need right now. If we don’t do it, we can never defeat evil.

platypus on November 7, 2012 at 1:17 PM

I despise these Ron Paul types more than the left…..btw I saw RuPaul on a CNN interview yesterday. He said he wouldn’t support romney and that there’s little differece between the two. RuPaul is an utter disgrace who’s accomplished nothing but a bunch of racist newsletters along with blaming America first!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 12:04 PM

This is why phony conservatives like you lose.

Dante on November 7, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Rush just nailed it. We.Are.Outnumbered.

Rockshine on November 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Just like he nailed calling it a landslide for Romney?

Please. He’s a gasbag. Entertaining, but a gasbag nonetheless. And a hypocritical one as well.

Dante on November 7, 2012 at 1:19 PM

They should put us on the endangered species list because we will soon be extinct.

tomas on November 7, 2012 at 1:19 PM

You know how people love to support the underdog team in sports? (unless you share a geographic location with the sure-win)
People identify with democrats because they see themselves as propping up the downtrodden little guy, or they view themselves as the underdog.

guera on November 7, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Ah, collectivism under the guise of benevolence. Even in a collective state, there will always be ovelords to rule over the useful idiots.

Alec Baldwin is typical benevolent democrat: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/01/24/new-york-city-targets-alec-baldwin-possible-tax-evasion

Kyle_Reese on November 7, 2012 at 1:20 PM

I wonder if last night’s results mean that this will create a bigger civil war within the GOP.

That’s the last thing we need right now.

daoster on November 7, 2012 at 1:12 PM

However we do need a more aggressive approach.

How many Romney ads do you remember that linked Obama to the Benghazi debacle or the Mexican gun runner operation for example.

It is a new world, and you have to attack your opponent in a way that will break him in the public eye. You can’t just rely on the facts finding their way to the public.

If Romney made a mistake it was this. He used too much logic and not enough emotion. Emotion is powerful, just look at the Chinese and Japanese messing around over a crappy rock.

William Eaton on November 7, 2012 at 1:22 PM

He doesn’t make ANY good points!

Yeah I’m sure Romney would’ve let 4 Americans get killed and not lift a finger to help!

I’m sure he’d smuggle guns to Mexico and do a massive coverup after the death of a border patrol agent and 300 Mexicans.

I’m sure he’d give billions to Solyndra

I’m sure he’d block the Keystone pipeline.

I’m sure he’d let the Bush tax cuts expire

I’m sure he’d make massive defense cuts.

And if he had a GOP senate he WOULD’VE REPEALED OBAMACARE — IT’D BE POLITICIAL SUICIDE NOT TO!!

You’ve been owned!!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Haha … I’ve been “owned”, eh? While the things you’re talking about are important to varying degrees, I know this to be true: only the rate of increase in spending would go down in a Romney administration. While that’s an improvement its only a slight improvement. There’s nothing wrong with defense spending cuts. We need spending cuts across the board. And even though Defense is Republicans cash cow, it needs to be cut as well. Furthermore, who knows what kind of debt we’d incur if Romney got us entangled in another needless foreign war. As far as Obamacare, I simply don’t believe he’d repeal it completely – even if he had the numbers. You believe him: fine. I do not. Now, is any of this a reason to vote for Obama? Of course not. But, next time Republicans might want to consider supporting a traditional conservative who actually believes strongly in the notion of limited government.

RobbBond on November 7, 2012 at 1:23 PM

We are headed to Assyria. After that, Babylon. After that, nothing.

williampeck1958 on November 7, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Update: Some readers feel I owe them an apology for “misleading” them about polling over the last few months. I kind of assumed that this post served as a mea culpa for getting it wrong by explaining why it happened. Very obviously, I misread the shift in the electorate. I wasn’t the only one who did so, but I did, and I do apologize for getting it wrong. However, I didn’t set out to mislead anyone. What I wrote was my honest opinion about how the polls were based on assumptions of the electorate with which I disagreed — and I’ll note that I linked to the source data every time, and that readers were certainly free to draw their own conclusions.

You’ve got absolutely nothing to apologize for. A lot of us made exactly the same mistake. I still don’t understand it, but there you go.

Rasmussen has a lot of work to do to figure out where they went so dramatically wrong. How did they come up with an R+6, (and Gallup with an R+1, for that matter) when the results were so clearly not that? And it’s not like Ras had a small sample set, either. Almost 10k respondents? That should have been a lock for reliability. But it ended up 12 points off. That’s frickin’ remarkable in its level of Fail.

There is a lot of soul searching to be done. And an honest assessment of the “other side’s” research methodologies, since they clearly had a better feel for the electorate.

I’m still baffled. The numbers simply don’t make any sense. But it’s hard to argue with reality, so some fundamental assumptions need to be re-examined, that’s for damn sure.

nukemhill on November 7, 2012 at 1:24 PM

So we have a fairly massive drop in support for Obama, 14% at least of his voters from four years ago not counting natural increase, a pathetic, demoralized campaign, visibly beaten and nervous on election night, clearly expecting to be soundly beaten, a ground game going through the motions. We have a confident if not outright enthusiastic Romney camp, chomping at the bit to get to the polls, lines out the door in GOP battleground sites, pundits carefully optimistic, and–at least 5% of the McCain voters decided to stay home and “undecided” voters in FL, VA, OH, WI mostly decided to break for Obama.

There is something very wrong with this picture. We already knew that Romney was a weak RINO yesterday when the future was bright and rosy because he was a lock. What, exactly, caused this result?

spiritof61 on November 7, 2012 at 1:25 PM

I’d agree with you–we don’t need a step, we need(ed) a GIANT LEAP. But, again, whoever that candidate was would not have done as well as Romney, IMO.

And, instead, we’ve assured our fall.

RedCrow on November 7, 2012 at 1:09 PM

+ 100..Hear!..Hear!..:)

Dire Straits on November 7, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Any “conservative” who is “alienated” by a guy like Romney when we’re staring down the barrel of 4 more years of Obama is too much of an idiotic basket case to comprehend anything at all.

Django on November 7, 2012 at 12:29 PM

+ 100..Enough said..:)

Dire Straits on November 7, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Any “conservative” who is “alienated” by a guy like Romney when we’re staring down the barrel of 4 more years of Obama is too much of an idiotic basket case to comprehend anything at all.

Django on November 7, 2012 at 12:29 PM

This is why you lose.

Dante on November 7, 2012 at 1:30 PM

The S&P 500 was at a little over 1,000 on 11/4/2008. After four years, it’s now at 1397 thanks to the Fed on very low volume and that’s not really much of a move in 4 years. The volume is key because it’s much easier to move prices on low volume. And these prices have been moved by the Fed’s inflationary dollars.

Django on November 7, 2012 at 12:39 PM

39.7% isn’t much of a move? If I had that return every four years for the rest of my life I would have an eight figure bank account at retirement.

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Strangely missing from HotAir: the news that Puerto Rico categorically chose to petition for statehood last night by 64%. And with PR’s representative in Congress a Democrat and pal of Obama’s, something will likely happen. More Democratic voters, here we come!

HotAir? crickets

JoseQuinones on November 7, 2012 at 1:35 PM

This is why phony conservatives like you lose.

Dante on November 7, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Phony?? How dare you!!!

I supported Sarah, Cain, Bachmann, then Santorum!

And I would’ve voted for Ron Paul over obama.

That’s because unlike YOU, I realize that Romney is no marxist and what a disaster 4 more years of obama will do to this once great country.

You will have to live with yourself for refusing to lift a finger to stop obama!!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Dow Jones was at 10,831.07 on 10/1/2008. No where near the bottom. Do you think I don’t have access to this data? Where try to put these lies past me?

sob0728 on November 7, 2012 at 12:37 PM

…and 9 days later it was at 8451 and 26 days later it was at 8176. Nov 20 it was at 7552.

Surely the markets had time to discount an 0bama vistory.

I’m not lying. I may not have the facts at my fingertips, but I wasn’t far off. So, stow it.

I’m weary of you and this pointless argument.

freedomfirst on November 7, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Phony?? How dare you!!!

I supported Sarah, Cain, Bachmann, then Santorum!

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Thank you for so strongly underscoring my point.

Dante on November 7, 2012 at 1:38 PM

This is why you lose.

Dante on November 7, 2012 at 1:30 PM

And you won??

Obama wins = Ron Paul and his sychophants win!!

Really says it all.

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 1:38 PM

It was losers like yourself who refused to get off your lazy a$$ to support ROmney that played a huge factor in ruining this country.

When the time came to fight to save our country you whined about how much it hurt you to have to even vote for Romney… awww poor baby!

Just remember you failed in fighting to stand up to evil and will have to live with it.

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Romney failed to stand up to evil. He even refused to name it. He even embraces it in many situations. Romney is a big government progressive liberal that was independent during Reagan Bush and did not like Reagan Bush. He instituted forced purchasing of medical care. He forced Catholics to provide abortion and contraceptive care before Obama was elected into office. He called coal power generation a people killing endeavor. He said the only way any new power could go online was if they could sequester the CO2 created in the natural process of burning carbon based fuels. He hired and worked with a known Malthusian for the environment. Nominated to judicial benches liberal activists. Fast tracked gay marriage by illegally bypassing the legislature to implement it while a constitutional amendment was working its way through the legislature, and thus killing the initiative. Instigated cap and trade of CO2, when it failed he initiated the first Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to make using fossil fuels too expensive in his neighborhood. He argued that the ocean should be off limits to energy production. He supported abortion, even after his supposed coming to Jesus moment with it. He supported TARP, supports entitlements, supported the GM and Chrysler deals, then did not, then did again and finally did not.

Would he have been marginally better than Obama, certainly he would have been. Would he have been sufficiently better than Obama, enough to change the direction of the nations future. Nothing about him indicates he would have been.

When it came time to save our nation, the TEA party elected house failed to deliver. When it came time to save our nation, the new media failed us and foisted Romney on us by destroying any alternative to him. When it came time to save our nation, McCain chose instead to witness the first black president and threw the race. When it came time to save our nation, Hot Airians demand to keep their entitled social security checks.

You guys do not want a saved nation, like lanceman, all you care about is that you get yours before you die. Then it can all go to hell as far as you are concerned. The only problem here is that the end of the line happened and now you demand to not be a part of history.

astonerii on November 7, 2012 at 1:39 PM

There is something very wrong with this picture. We already knew that Romney was a weak RINO yesterday when the future was bright and rosy because he was a lock. What, exactly, caused this result?

spiritof61 on November 7, 2012 at 1:25 PM

I don’t know. It really seemed as if he had consolidated the Republican vote. But, apparently that wasn’t the case.

I suspect there are a few reasons for yesterday, but here’s the sense I get …

1. Rightly or wrongly the media has been successful at painting Republicans as extreme on social issues. Comments like those made by Akin really didn’t help. A large portion of our country got caught up in these issues of gay marriage, abortion, free birth control, etc and chose not to focus on the bleak economic numbers. I think this is where a large portion of that youth vote goes.

2. As much as I dislike the guy, Bill O’Reilly was correct last night when he said that more and more people are demanding more and more entitlements from their government. They’ve been given a taste and they want more. Because it’s “easy money”.

3. As much as some on here would love to intervene in the affairs of every country in the Middle East, I suspect there are a large number of voters (and even Rs) who feel this approach is flawed. Granted, Obama follows the same approach, but he does it more discreetly and has the media covering for him.

I know how to tackle the first issue, but it may not be amenable to most on here. The second issue you’ve got to wait until the inevitable economic collapse occurs. I also know how to solve the third issue, but most on here wouldn’t be amenable to it either.

RobbBond on November 7, 2012 at 1:39 PM

But there will always be somebody else for them to blame.

Kyle_Reese on November 7, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Nice post. However, calling them “clients” gets them halfway to the entitlement mindset. I believe “recipients” is a more descriptive, yet respectful noun.

freedomfirst on November 7, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Believe me, they enter the room with an air of entitlement. One typical example is an urban minority (racist!) who had Section 8. She expected help because she was getting kicked out of housing. Why? Because she couldnt pay her part of rent: $10/month.

Imagine that mindset overwhelming charities and government agencies.

I will probably continue to volunteer but for Conservatives. I have no sympathy for these liberals who want freebies and hate Conservatives for denying what is entitled to them. Let them fend for themselves.

Kyle_Reese on November 7, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Well then, let me “respectfully” say that WIC is a perfect example of our society subsidizing behavior we profess not to encourage. But I’m just a clean-cut white guy who pays the subsidies. My tax rate is higher than Romney’s because I’m reliant on my paycheck for most of my income. I’ve always been blue-collar but I’ve never received any EITC, or any dole of any sort. And I have been unemployed; I just couldn’t take the government check. I just get made to pay without any say. And it doesn’t matter how ineffectual the social program, how much it exacerbates the problem it’s meant to solve- the program’s not going away. And I don’t qualify. And the laws that qualify you for every entitlement, every school admission, and every job before me are innumerable. I’m the racist, sexist discriminator that is keeping the minorities down. As a ‘federal employee’ who gets to travel the loveliest parts of the world and take incoming, I get lectured and hectored about that all the time.

Sorry about the dirty look.

M240H on November 7, 2012 at 11:48 AM

I never said I was a minority, if I did it would be a lie because I am white. This is not personal.

Ed mistakenly misread the electorate. I have been discussing with my family for months that I think Obama will win. Maybe I have another perspective because of past life experiences (ie. using WIC), being part of a bi-racial family, or living in a lower-income area. Or maybe I just guessed lucky.

My point is: there are MANY people I personally know who agree with conservative values when you tic them off one by one, yet they still feel they can put their trust into Obama.

And I vehemently disagree 47% of people will never vote for a Republican because they want to do nothing but take from others. I voted for the GOP in presidential elections when I was low income.

No derogatory names were called in my post, no apology was called for, so there is no need for a sarcastic apology. All I did was share some perspective from the other side.

guera on November 7, 2012 at 1:41 PM

I’d agree with you–we don’t need a step, we need(ed) a GIANT LEAP. But, again, whoever that candidate was would not have done as well as Romney, IMO.

And, instead, we’ve assured our fall.

RedCrow on November 7, 2012 at 1:09 PM

I don’t know how you can say this.

We lost the turnout 38 to 32 –about the same as 2008!

So not enough conservatives voted.

Romney won indies 50/45.

So he needed to appeal to his base, not to these wishy washy moderates.

And ROmney never even mentioning Fast/Furious,givig obama a pass on Libya in the last debate after it was served on a silver platter to him, and continually referred to obama as a nice guy!

Newt or Santorum would’ve appealed to the base and fought obama hard.

LevinFan on November 7, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Comment pages: 1 7 8 9 10 11 12