Projection: Nearly eight million white voters who were expected to vote, didn’t; Update: Or did they?

posted at 6:59 pm on November 8, 2012 by Allahpundit

Essential reading from Sean Trende about the new demographic reality at the polls. Based on his back-of-the-envelope math, there are actually two reasons why there were more minority voters as a share of the electorate this time. One, the reason everyone knows: There were more minority voters, period. Two, the reason no one guessed: If current projections hold, there were many, many fewer white voters at the polls this year than in 2008.

Had the same number of white voters cast ballots in 2012 as did in 2008, the 2012 electorate would have been about 74 percent white, 12 percent black, and 9 percent Latino (the same result occurs if you build in expectations for population growth among all these groups). In other words, the reason this electorate looked so different from the 2008 electorate is almost entirely attributable to white voters staying home. The other groups increased their vote, but by less than we would have expected simply from population growth.

Who were they? He looked at his home state of Ohio to try to guess:

Where things drop off are in the rural portions of Ohio, especially in the southeast. These represent areas still hard-hit by the recession. Unemployment is high there, and the area has seen almost no growth in recent years.

My sense is these voters were unhappy with Obama. But his negative ad campaign relentlessly emphasizing Romney’s wealth and tenure at Bain Capital may have turned them off to the Republican nominee as well. The Romney campaign exacerbated this through the challenger’s failure to articulate a clear, positive agenda to address these voters’ fears, and self-inflicted wounds like the “47 percent” gaffe. Given a choice between two unpalatable options, these voters simply stayed home.

Yeah, I always thought the goal of Team O’s multifaceted class demagoguery of Romney wasn’t so much to win white working-class votes for Obama, which may have been unwinnable, as to keep potential Romney voters home. (Ross Douthat wrote about that in August too.) If Trende’s math is right, looks like it worked like gangbusters. Another bonbon from the national exit poll:

When voters were asked the same question about Obama, 10% said he’d favor the rich versus 44% who said the middle class. That was one of Romney’s meta-problems in trying to sell himself as the “recovery” candidate, of course. He was easily cast as a stereotypical rich country club Republican, and inexplicably he never did obvious things that he could have done to fight that image. He didn’t run positive ads early, while Obama was busy tearing him down every day with attack ads. He refused to run biographical ads until the very end showing off what a warm, kindhearted guy he is. He never went after Obama systematically on the basic point that preserving the liberal dream of a ballooning welfare state will require taxes on the middle class, not just “the one percent.” And he never pushed an agenda that was aimed overtly at breaks for the middle class. His task this year was to usher in a “new” Republican Party, partly in the spirit of the 2010 tea party takeover and partly in the spirit of flushing out all the stuff under Bush that soured the country on the GOP. But apart from choosing Paul Ryan, who didn’t get nearly as much time as I thought he would to push fiscal reform, there wasn’t a lot that felt new. Essentially, voters could keep O or give the guy who sounded like the guy whom O replaced a shot. Not surprising that a lot of people shrugged and stayed home.

This didn’t help Romney either:

The economic numbers are ugly but the trends were all the right way for O, and his final job approval ended up being several points higher than Bush’s was when he won reelection in 2004. How can that be? Well, here’s something I wrote in June of last year that I’ve been thinking about since Tuesday. There was an AP poll at the time that asked voters whether it was realistic to expect significant improvement in the economy in Obama’s first two years in office or whether it would take longer than that. To my surprise, the data showed that not only did the public not expect quick improvement, the number who said they didn’t remained basically constant month after month after month. Even though we were getting further and further into O’s term, the public wasn’t getting impatient. Here was my attempt to explain why at the time:

I think it could go two ways if he doesn’t turn things around by next year. One: The public will continue to cut him lots of slack well into 2012, but as the election approaches and they realize that this will be their last chance until 2016 to change course, they’ll bail and we’ll see a rapid snowball effect among those blaming him for not fixing the economy. Or two: The public will decide that the current recession is so uniquely horrible, unlike anything since the Great Depression, that it’s unfair to expect any president to make major strides in just one term, which will have the ironic effect of partly neutralizing the economy as an electoral issue. That’s completely counterintuitive given its singular importance right now (fully 93 percent in this poll say the economy is extremely or very important to them, an all-time high), but paradoxically the worse things get, the easier it is for Obama to frame slow growth and chronically high unemployment as some sort of mega-quake or force majeure for which no one could reasonably be expected to have been prepared.

Boldface added. How’s that prediction looking today? Here’s Joel Benenson, the Obama campaign’s pollster, explaining the keys to victory in the Times this morning:

Such conventional [economic] indicators failed to capture the mind-set of the American people who always had a broader view of the nation’s economic situation and what had happened to their lives. A national survey of 800 voters conducted by our firm — not for the Obama campaign — during the final weekend before Tuesday’s vote, confirmed that a clear majority of Americans viewed this election in the context of the scale of the economic crisis we faced and the deep recession that ensued.

Two key data points illustrate why Americans were always far more open to President Obama’s message and accomplishments than commentators assumed. By a three to one margin (74 percent to 23 percent), voters said that what the country faced since 2008 was an “extraordinary crisis more severe than we’ve seen in decades” as opposed to “a typical recession that the country has every several years.” At the same time, a clear majority, 57 percent, believed that the problems we faced after the crisis were “too severe for anyone to fix in a single term,” while only 4 in 10 voters believed another president would have been able to do more than Mr. Obama to get the economy moving in the past four years.

Bill Clinton famously pushed that message at the convention too, that this economic hurricane was actually Katrina/Sandy and therefore no one could reasonably be expected to have cleaned up all the debris yet. The voters bought it, and Romney’s only real countermove — hammering O on how housing policies championed by Democrats contributed to the fiscal crisis in 2008 — never really happened.

Anyway, this is all a way to try to explain why middle-class whites might have stayed home. As further validation of Trende’s theory, a quick comparison between the 2012 and 2008 exit polls shows that, among the six income classes used to measure voters, turnout as a percentage of the total electorate increased in five of them. The only one that dropped, by a whopping five percent (36% four years ago to 31% now): Voters who earn between $50,000 and $99,999 per year, i.e. the middle class. Obama and McCain basically split that vote, but Romney had a six-point advantage this time among those who showed up. Not enough did.

Needless to say, though, none of this should be taken as reassurance that the GOP’s majority is still out there and that they only need to concentrate on turning out working-class whites next time. If you assume that the exit poll’s 59/39 R/O split among whites who voted would have also held for whites who didn’t, then Romney lost a net 1.3 million votes from those who stayed home based on Trende’s projections. That’s an awful lot, but based on the current popular vote totals, it’s still not enough to erase Obama’s popular vote advantage. In fact, the GOP has won the popular vote in a presidential election just once since 1988, and arguably that one — Bush’s victory in 2004 — was sui generis, a product of unusual dynamics after 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq. You know how Democrats regularly outnumber Republicans in polls of adults and registered voters? Well, the lesson of this election is that Obama’s organization was good enough at turning people out to make election day results look like a poll of registered voters. That’s a scary prospect for the GOP, and turning out more rural whites in Ohio won’t be enough to solve it.

Update: Pollster Bill McInturff fires back hard at Trende’s theory by insisting that, while turnout may be down a little this year, the “missing” voters can be explained very simply: They just haven’t been counted yet. In 2008, fully 9.5 million votes weren’t counted until after election day. This year, it could be as high as 9.9 million based on projection. In fact, he says, turnout in swing states was up. It’s the Sandy states, not surprisingly, where the vote went down:

Two things, though. One: Trende’s piece attempted to account for ballots that hadn’t been counted yet. He estimated that seven million were still outstanding. Even if he lowballed the number, there are still a lot of “missing” voters. Two: The exit poll data about reduced turnout among middle-class voters is what it is, no matter how many ballots are still out. I’m not sure why Sandy would have affected the middle class disproportionately, which means something else was keeping people in that bracket from the polls.

Update: Trende e-mails with a third objection to McInturff. Turnout in Ohio, the swingiest state of all, evidently was not up this year:

Ohio vote is in, less provisional ballots. That’s why I used Ohio for my article. Absentees here were counted first this year.

200K provisional ballots were cast in 2008. If as many were cast this year, it would yield about 3.35M votes in OH (since about a fifth to a quarter are typically tossed).

In 2008, 3.62M were cast. So contra McInturff’s post, turnout was down in at least one swing state not on the Atlantic coast, and by about 8% at that. Of course, Ohio’s population has also grown since 2008, if only slightly.


Related Posts:

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 2 3 4 7

Rush has it at 3 million:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/11/08/why_did_three_million_republicans_stay_home

Looking at the last four elections, W won twice by small margins, McCain lost because most of the base sat it out and Romney lost even more.

It’s time for a wake up call somewhere, somehow. There is nothing moderate about the dems any more. Can we agree on that? An affable genial, country club, ball less GOP isn’t gonna work.

Heck, I didn’t want to vote for Romney. Some people just saw no significant difference between them and whose fault is it that they couldn’t?

dogsoldier on November 8, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Compared to McCain, Romney was a far superior candidate, but was susceptible to considerable negative attack ads, the only thing Team Obama could do since he had a horrible record that he couldn’t run on.

But, Romney was also seen as a moderate or as an out-of-touch billionaier by several million of our voters, many (I think 3-5 million) who just stayed home or voted L.

That said, and in retrospect, had our super-pacs fought back against the negative picture that was being painted of Romney for those many months before the convention where he couldn’t spend money, with positive ads showing him not to be a monster, it might’ve helped stint the slide.

Even so, in 2016, the only way we’re going to win is with a conservative candidate (doesn’t have to be perfect conservative, but a clearly consistent one over the years) and one who will refuse to pander to Hispanics with amnesty or amnesty light (that won’t get a single Hispanic vote anyway), and who’s ready to do some serious street fighting against the Dem nominee. Playing nice don’t work!

TXUS on November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Remember that time Ann Coulter predicted that if we didn’t nominate Chris Christie, that we would nominate Romney, and that the week before the election Christie would go out of his way to kneecap Romney, and we would lose?

Lawdawg86 on November 8, 2012 at 7:37 PM

I believe Christie wanted Romney to lose. Had Romney been successful, Paul Ryan would have been “on deck” after a Romney Presidency.

If the “Fatman” wins re-election, watch him start building a Presidential campaign. Christie is a snake.

bw222 on November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/333010/election-and-right-yuval-levin

somehow got chopped off

r keller on November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

How far away are we from counting all the ballots..?

The legacy media portrayed Mitt as an wealthy elitist completely out of touch from the work a day rural American. The car elevator story is the first example I thought of…

d1carter on November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Maybe they threw out millions of Republican votes. Why do we assume there was no widespread cheating? Faith in Democrats?

Buddahpundit on November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Just tonight, AMNESTY is number one on Boehners’ to-do list.

Folks, I told you.

THE GOP IS DEAD. Make other plans.

Let them go the way of the Whigs. We’re going to have Democrats in charge for a long long time (with this type of leadership from the republicans).

PappyD61 on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 7:38 PM

I take it numbers are hard for you, logic too?

If our own sat out this race because of some misplaced ideological litmus test, all the while Obama was smearing him as a bloodthirsty capitalist, stripping away more “white voters” I’d say the problem lies on OUR side for not defending one of our own for being exactly what’s RIGHT about America.

And shame on all of you for piling on more after he and Ryan fought hard to help undo what Obama foisted upon us. You’re just continuing the left’s work for them, free. Ever think they WANT us divided? This absolutely disgusts me.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

No terryannonline I don’t like the fact that a guy with no accomplishments is being set up as President by the Rs. And I think that it is incredibly hypocritical that posters here are promoting him while criticizing Obama for the same vapidness… m’kay.

Illinidiva on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Remember that time Ann Coulter predicted that if we didn’t nominate Chris Christie, that we would nominate Romney, and that the week before the election Christie would go out of his way to kneecap Romney, and we would lose?

Lawdawg86 on November 8, 2012 at 7:37 PM

She, like many other conservative columnists, has been in the beltway too long.

predator on November 8, 2012 at 7:46 PM

When I went to vote, 2 people in front if me both were told that they had already requested their absentee ballot…they were flummoxed and did not understand how that could happen…I still think they got to vote, but not sure if their votes would count because they had to go to another desk from where I was at…I thought it was very odd and by the look on their face, so did they.

I live in Florida.

Alinsky on November 8, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Is that fishy.com site still up?

Nevermind.

Something is still rotten, and it ain’t in Denmark.

hillbillyjim on November 8, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Maybe they threw out millions of Republican votes. Why do we assume there was no widespread cheating? Faith in Democrats?

Buddahpundit on November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

You know it’s bad when UN officials tell us the same. Yet no one seems to know what to do to possibly correct it…hm. I wonder why.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Friends were telling me the GOP lost at 4 PM based on the length of the lines and the color of the people in them.

Latinos will be a wild goose for the Republican Party.

We can’t seem to win the big one for love nor money after we hand out amnesty, it will be worse..

Lets nominate Former Governor Sarah Palin just to watch the libs go nuts.

I don’t really listen to most of the speeches now so she will not bother me.

I think Pappy61 needs to watch the movie Game Change.

IlikedAUH2O on November 8, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Romney/Rubio never came close to that number.

gumbyandpokey on November 8, 2012 at 7:39 PM

Palin was the first female Republican vice-president pick. Rubio wasn’t on the ticket. BIG difference.

terryannonline on November 8, 2012 at 7:47 PM

“In 2008, fully 9.5 million votes weren’t counted until after election day. This year, it could be as high as 9.9 million based on projection.”

HUH?

Then how, pray tell, is this election over and decided?

Opposite Day on November 8, 2012 at 7:47 PM

On the cheating topic-turnout in some Phildelphia wards was 99-100%. All for Obama. Coincidentally, some Philadelphia wards locked out the Republican poll watchers.

But I’m sure Obama honestly got 100% of voters to turn out and this is not a sign of fraud. (Story on Drudge.

talkingpoints on November 8, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Even so, in 2016, the only way we’re going to win is with a conservative candidate (doesn’t have to be perfect conservative, but a clearly consistent one over the years) and one who will refuse to pander to Hispanics with amnesty or amnesty light (that won’t get a single Hispanic vote anyway), and who’s ready to do some serious street fighting against the Dem nominee. Playing nice don’t work!

TXUS on November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

I agree completely.

dogsoldier on November 8, 2012 at 7:48 PM

astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 7:08 PM

.
Who knew, that being a FOOD STAMP President was actually a good thing ?

FlaMurph on November 8, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Anyone else seeing how the libtards NOW want Romney as part of ODumbo’s cabinet? They realize and admit that Romney has the answer to save the economy and country, and Osama-Obama doesn’t,but they still wanted Bronko to win. They saying how smart Mitt is and he should be the Secretary Of Jobs, Business or Commerce.

Kenya believe that?

Rockshine on November 8, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Coming out of Chicago and with three solid years to work it, nothing would surprise me.

IlikedAUH2O on November 8, 2012 at 7:48 PM

It’s simple. Voter suppression worked. They obviously bought into the either the Obama propaganda that Romney was an evil rich guy, or the main stream media’s meme of Obama’s inevitability that the MSM was pushing over a month before the first debate. Remember, they said it was over back in September.

Perhaps they haven’t felt enough pain yet.

Rockshine on November 8, 2012 at 7:26 PM

THIS.
1. And for the entire Spring and most of the Summer, Obama’s attacks went unanswered by Romney. White working class voters and Reagan Democrats did not like Obama – but they weren’t motivated to turnout for the rich, out-of-touch plutocrat who enjoyed firing people and closing down plants.
2. Romney’s campaign seemed to mostly ignore the base and took the base for granted. For most of September and October he ran a squish campaign that was aimed at the 3-4% undecideds in the middle.
3. His snubbing of Ron Paul, who never endorsed him, and his snubbing of Sarah Palin didn’t help matters either. Say what you will about Sarah, but the base loves her. Her endorsement of Romney was lukewarm at best – more of an Anybody But Obama thing.

STILL, something is just not right about the numbers. During the early voting period, every report I read demonstrated how our early voting numbers were exceeding 2008 numbers. Every poll showed higher Republican enthusiasm. Mitt was drawing great crowds. How could the numbers just tank on election day?

TarheelBen on November 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Wino on November 8, 2012 at 7:19 PM

So you’re saying that you didn’t vote.

For the first 48 hrs. after the election I was pissed at all those dummies who voted for the Won. Now I’m pissed at the 8 million like you who just sat on their keesters and allowed this train wreck to happen. I drove 100 miles round trip to vote early since I had to be back in ND on the 6th. I won’t walk 3 feet to offer assistance to pukes like you when it gets really tough next year.

Oh by the way my grandchildren all say FU to the 8 million and 1.

jrsrigmvr on November 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM

In NC the last 2 weeks, Obama ran non-stop 47% attack ads against Romney on Country Radio.

This was his strategy, to keep white voters from voting.

jp on November 8, 2012 at 7:42 PM

Democratic candidates and strategists play to win. Republican candidates and strategists main concerns are not getting their uniforms dirty and making sure everyone will like them after the election is over.

bw222 on November 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM

What I still don’t understand is how so many voters could sit out this election regardless of whatever reservations they may have had about Romney. Everyone inclined to vote GOP knew that we had one last shot at repealing Obamacare and it was Romney/Ryan. They knew only Romney/Ryan were going to do anything about the deficit. They knew only Romney/Ryan were going to expand domestic energy production in the areas of oil, coal, and natural gas. And they knew the economy still sucked after 4 years. So what gives? Or am I giving this portion of the electorate too much credit?

I take some comfort in the fact that a lot of these voters who didn’t show up(and some who did but voted for Obama) will finally set aside their Bush hatred after 4 more years of economic malaise and realize that 8 straight years of sh-tty growth and anemic job creation doesn’t just happen in a vacuum and that just maybe that cool cat in the White House and his party might have something to do with it. The only problem is that by then we could be in such a deep hole that it’ll take decades to dig out of it. I just hope they give President Rubio or whomever inherits that mess the same amount of leeway they’re apparently willing to grant Obama.

Doughboy on November 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM

No terryannonline I don’t like the fact that a guy with no accomplishments is being set up as President by the Rs. And I think that it is incredibly hypocritical that posters here are promoting him while criticizing Obama for the same vapidness… m’kay.

Illinidiva on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I have no idea how you can call Rubio vapid. Have you ever heard the man speak? Nothing vapid about him.

terryannonline on November 8, 2012 at 7:50 PM

If current projections hold, there were many, many fewer white voters at the polls this year than in 2008.

Indirect “Bradley Effect”?

farsighted on November 8, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Give us a real candidate, and maybe we’ll be there. The left passes crap for their base. When we gave the GOP everything, we got more spending and more government.
Tell me again how things are going to be worse under Obomney than they would have been under Rombama.
Wino on November 8, 2012 at 7:40 PM

At least your nickname is appropriate. I have a lot of problems with the GOP, but if you truly can’t see the difference between the two parties, I might have to agree that it was a good thing you didn’t vote. Next time you see the families of someone who lost one of their sons or daughters in a war fighting to give us the freedoms we have, tell them you didn’t vote because you didn’t feel any candidate was good enough to deserve your vote. At the very least, the GOP is a lot more supportive of our troops. Than in itself is reason enough for me to vote.

bandutski on November 8, 2012 at 7:50 PM

I personally think something is fishy. I have never bought into “voter fraud” claims that would significantly alter the elections outcome – till now.

There is no way you can tell me 8 million voters stayed home, not with the enthusiasm the crowds that Romney was getting and not with the very clear and well defined differences between Obama and Romney and surely not with Obama’s 4 year record of failures. Romney getting less than McCain – that is hogwash and smells of voter fraud to no end.

I honestly think something is fishy and I truly wish someone would do an investigation into massive voter fraud, I think our election has been rigged and stolen.

bzip on November 8, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Obama got 11 million less voters because people rejected his policies. Just where did those people go?
They should have gone to the republican win column.

in the last 4 presidential elections the voting totals have increased 7% each year. This year they are down 11%

It only takes a few key suburban counties in a few key swing states to flip…

you do the math

audiotom on November 8, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Me too.

hoosierma on November 8, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Remember that time Ann Coulter predicted that if we didn’t nominate Chris Christie, that we would nominate Romney, and that the week before the election Christie would go out of his way to kneecap Romney, and we would lose?

Lawdawg86 on November 8, 2012 at 7:37 PM
I believe Christie wanted Romney to lose. Had Romney been successful, Paul Ryan would have been “on deck” after a Romney Presidency.

If the “Fatman” wins re-election, watch him start building a Presidential campaign. Christie is a snake.

bw222 on November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

At this point Christie has no chance at a national office because of his actions, but I don’t think he planned this. Sandy was a natural disaster. His state was devastated. He asked Obama for help. In the early days it looked like FEMA was doing a competent job. Christie was appreciative. I doubt it had nearly as much impact as voter fraud, anyway.

talkingpoints on November 8, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Just tonight, AMNESTY is number one on Boehners’ to-do list.

Folks, I told you.

THE GOP IS DEAD. Make other plans.

Let them go the way of the Whigs. We’re going to have Democrats in charge for a long long time (with this type of leadership from the republicans).

PappyD61 on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Sheesh, he’s an idiot. Boehner should be trying to figure out why our own voters didn’t show up – and not trying to make us more like the Democrats. Mark Levin has been talking about this tonight.

TarheelBen on November 8, 2012 at 7:52 PM

I take it numbers are hard for you, logic too?

If our own sat out this race because of some misplaced ideological litmus test, all the while Obama was smearing him as a bloodthirsty capitalist, stripping away more “white voters” I’d say the problem lies on OUR side for not defending one of our own for being exactly what’s RIGHT about America.

And shame on all of you for piling on more after he and Ryan fought hard to help undo what Obama foisted upon us. You’re just continuing the left’s work for them, free. Ever think they WANT us divided? This absolutely disgusts me.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I know, what part of numbers do I not understand.
Romney got fewer votes and fewer electoral college numbers than was needed to win the election.
FAILURE.
HIS JOB WAS TO WIN. HE FAILED.
CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR MOST ELECTABLE CANDIDATE.
I voted for him, 6 of 9 of my office mates stayed home, they voted McCain in 08, while I stayed home in 08.
Romney is a bigger failure than McCain was in 08. McCain was a complete disaster that seems to have actually tried to lose the election.
Romney did worse than McCain in 08 when Republicans were more demoralized in general. Romney did worse than McCain in 08, when Bush was pushing out TARP for his failed stewardship of the economy.
Numbers.
So, what part of numbers are you insinuating that I do not get?

astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Anyone have any idea how much of Romney’s personal wealth he spent on his two failed campaigns?

bw222 on November 8, 2012 at 7:53 PM

And you and your ilk are disturbingly divisive, a blot on conservatism if you think this ticket was really the problem.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Mitt Romney is a fine, hard-working, and generous man. His wife is an outstanding woman. So eat me, sister.

He ran a weak, nice-guy campaign, just like McCain did and got his butt handed to him. His running mate, Paul Ryan, couldn’t even deliver Wisconsin for him. One of the main reasons to pick a running mate is to help you in a region where you think you’re weak.

So you can take your “disturbingly divisive” crap and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine. I don’t need lectures from the likes of you about conservatism or anything else.

Capice?

predator on November 8, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Of course Palin increased turnout. I made a bumper sticker in 2008 that said, “Palin for Vice President.”

Let me show you the easy way to figure out why Romney lost: The left puts forth a far left loon, and he gets elected. The right puts forth an “electable moderate” and gets beat.

Quit letting the media tell you which candidate should win the nomination. This election was lost when Romney the Electable got the nomination.

I’d rather lose with a real conservative than lose with a “not the other guy” like we keep getting.

Wino on November 8, 2012 at 7:53 PM

And I think that it is incredibly hypocritical that posters here are promoting him while criticizing Obama for the same vapidness… m’kay.

Illinidiva on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Sweet Jesus. Seriously…Marco Rubio. Vapid.
If this is conservatism, I’m out. You’re cannibals.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Doughboy on November 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM
Or am I giving this portion of the electorate too much credit?

This.

d1carter on November 8, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Heck, I didn’t want to vote for Romney. Some people just saw no significant difference between them and whose fault is it that they couldn’t?

dogsoldier on November 8, 2012 at 7:26 PM

I saw this on another site from an American engineering student. I have to admit that he made a good argument:

“I’m an engineering graduate student at a prestigious university.
This election, I simply could not pull the lever for Mitt Romney. His cravenness before the slam-dunk-winning illegal immigration issue, the Obamnesty, the naked criminality on display in The Fast and the Furious scandal, his refusal to support the Chick-Fil-A protest buycott, and lastly the hated Affirmative Action, made him simply repellant to me. Obama may want to give amnesty to illegals, but Romney wants to import all of Asia to compete against me, utterly diminishing the worth of my long hard and fought for (heh, still fighting for!) degree.

The Spanish language television ad he aired promising amnesty (“immigration reform” or whatever it was) was the final straw.

He practically erased every conceivable reason I would have to vote for him, step-by-step.”

TxAnn56 on November 8, 2012 at 7:54 PM

I like Trende, but he is wrong.

Give it time.

He could be wright about the SouthEast. They were supposed to offset the auto unions of Toledo. They certainly did not.

Another factor, which I was warning about for months, was the usually consistent public sector Repub voters. They threatened to sit out after SB5, and I was assured by State GOP people that was no longer an issue.

But when Obama ends up carrying the percentage of white males and married females he did, that’s not from private sector people.

Romney carried all the major ‘burbs, which is where the fight was supposed to be. He even flipped Lake and Stark Counties, the bellweathers.

Maybe just enough sat out to cost Romney OH.

The current working idea from the OH ground is some group lied. State GOP, National GOP or Team Romney.

It could be a collusion between all three.

IMO, the rolls were. They knew it and buried the info to-

1. Not suppress the base

2. Hopefully disillusion Obama voters

budfox on November 8, 2012 at 7:54 PM

They knew only Romney/Ryan were going to expand domestic energy production in the areas of oil, coal, and natural gas. And they knew the economy still sucked after 4 years. So what gives? Or am I giving this portion of the electorate too much credit?

Doughboy on November 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM

You are giving the elctorate too much credit.

talkingpoints on November 8, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Friends were telling me the GOP lost at 4 PM based on the length of the lines and the color of the people in them.

I live in a very Red area and felt that way when I voted. Way too many African-Americans who I didn’t recognize and were getting provisional ballots, along with a lot of single white women with little kids who voted in 30 seconds or less. It depressed me and I knew then the talk of a Romney landslide was bunk.

Rockshine on November 8, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Remember that time Ann Coulter predicted that if we didn’t nominate Chris Christie, that we would nominate Romney, and that the week before the election Christie would go out of his way to kneecap Romney, and we would lose?

Lawdawg86 on November 8, 2012 at 7:37 PM

I believe Christie wanted Romney to lose. Had Romney been successful, Paul Ryan would have been “on deck” after a Romney Presidency.

If the “Fatman” wins re-election, watch him start building a Presidential campaign. Christie is a snake.

bw222 on November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

This is how much love Hot Air readers showed Christie at the start of this cycle in 2010: he was the 1st place choice.

I’m pretty sure Fat Boy isn’t going to be feeling the love next time around, or ever after.

cool breeze on November 8, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Who knew, that being a FOOD STAMP President was actually a good thing ?

FlaMurph on November 8, 2012 at 7:48 PM

The federal government MUST get out of the business of transferring wealth to individuals.

Including Social Security.

astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Sweet Jesus. Seriously…Marco Rubio. Vapid.
If this is conservatism, I’m out. You’re cannibals.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 7:53 PM

I don’t like calling people racists but her posts these past few days have really focused on Rubio and his race and really hateful.

terryannonline on November 8, 2012 at 7:56 PM

In Michigan, my 18 year old daughter and her friend went to vote and discovered that they were actually registered to vote in OH, and weren’t permitted to vote. I don’t think they knew enough to request a provisional ballot.

I assume they were registered when they received their MI drivers license, but why OH?

I told her that she probably voted for Obama in OH.

moo on November 8, 2012 at 7:56 PM

Gosh.. so Rubio, our Latino savior, couldn’t even deliver FL. Get ready for a long time in the wilderness.

Illinidiva on November 8, 2012 at 7:36 PM

No terryannonline I don’t like the fact that a guy with no accomplishments is being set up as President by the Rs. And I think that it is incredibly hypocritical that posters here are promoting him while criticizing Obama for the same vapidness… m’kay.

Illinidiva on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Whazzamatta, Shelleybean? Ya got a bug up your big ol’ butt? Your last two posts make a strong case for your being a clueless bitter sh*t who doesn’t even know how to be gracious in the face of victory. You’re not fooling many. Terryannonline and I may disagree on some of the finer points, but your behavior towards her only strengthens her promontory view.

hillbillyjim on November 8, 2012 at 7:56 PM

I hope conservative voters that sat out and handed Obama a second term rot in hell. If our side doesnt even give a crap about this country it really is over.

Jack_Burton on November 8, 2012 at 7:56 PM

Allah, I think yoy are misreading Trende’s thesis. You base your projection of Romney got getting enough votes on the assumption of all eight million “missing” voters turning out. That is not where Trende is coming from.

He makes the assumption that the lost Obama voters were truly lost voters — that they had soured on Obama, would not vote for Romney, so they sat out. Trende is saying that three million McCain voters, who would be expected to also turn out for Romney if he were acceptable to them, also chose to sit out. Why? He eliminated the possibility of anti-Mormonism (at least to his satisfaction) and concluded that Obama’s effort at defining Romney as not in sync with them and their needs made him unacceptable to them and convinced them to sit out. Had those efforts been unsuccessful, Romney SHOULD have had enough votes to win.

SCSoxFan on November 8, 2012 at 7:57 PM

Conservatives tried to tell the ROMBOTS that Romney was not electable and would never get the base to support him. We also warned you ROMBOTS that he would be seen as a rich out of touch white guy who would never connect with the average Joe. He trashed the tea party and conservatives and you wonder why 3 million conservatives didn’t vote for him. Talk about stoooooopid. No, you RINO losers are insane because you keep doing the same thing over and over and keep expecting different results.

And Rubio is not the candidate we need in 2016. Odds are against him winning. How many Pub. Senators in the last 30 yrs. have ever won the POTUS job? How many Dem. Senators? How many congressmen win? How many non politicians, a la Herman Cain win? Can you say GOVERNORS!!! And we have some damn good ones to choose from for 2016. Forget Rubio. If he were not Latino, he’d be at the bottomn of the list because he has no experience. Leave the Identity politics to the Dems. We are better than that. Hell, one affirmative action POTUS is enough.

they lie on November 8, 2012 at 7:58 PM

As things are lookin’..
I can cancel my Greek vacation next year and just open my front door…

Electrongod on November 8, 2012 at 7:58 PM

So you’re saying that you didn’t vote.

Oh by the way my grandchildren all say FU to the 8 million and 1.

jrsrigmvr on November 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM

I have voted in every election since 1980 except for 1984 when I was overseas in the military, until now.

I posted here on HA asking for any reason to vote for Romney. What did I get? A bunch of crap just like you’re spewing now.

I’m the face of what happened. I’m tired of the GOP “electables” I keep getting handed. I haven’t seen a real candidate to vote FOR since Reagan.

Tell me… which of these was conservative?

Geo HW Bush?
Bob Dole?
Geo W Bush?
John McCain?
Mitt Romney?

Lemme see… nope. All big government “electable” candidates. Go ahead and blame me. I only voted for McCain because of Palin. Ryan wasn’t enough, and blaming me for YOU caving to the media and putting for a democrat-lite because… well, honestly, I don’t know why you put forth yet another one.

Maybe when the media tells you the next conservative is “not electable” you won’t listen.

Wino on November 8, 2012 at 7:59 PM

missing ballots?

I thought the only problem was that they stuffed the ballot box with phony ballots.

Pretty clever though. At the polling places let some before-work and after-work boxes be misplaced , aka an error which is not a felony.

it does explain low turn out numbers but huge lines waiting to vote.

huntingmoose on November 8, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Mitt Romney is a fine, hard-working, and generous man. His wife is an outstanding woman. So eat me, sister.

He ran a weak, nice-guy campaign, just like McCain did and got his butt handed to him. His running mate, Paul Ryan, couldn’t even deliver Wisconsin for him. One of the main reasons to pick a running mate is to help you in a region where you think you’re weak.

So you can take your “disturbingly divisive” crap and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine. I don’t need lectures from the likes of you about conservatism or anything else.

Capice?

predator on November 8, 2012 at 7:53 PM

No thanks on the eating part. I’m pretty full after all the shite the left shoved down my throat.

Romney was much more decisive, much more aggressive than John McCain. Perhaps he came off as a nice guy because, well, he’s a nice guy. But in terms of the issues, there wasn’t a single time I was disappointed aside from the Benghazi situation. Should have hit harder on that. But, alas, hindsight.

And, regarding the lectures on conservatism? lol What exactly do you think you’re doing here yourself? erm…opining about conservatism, correct? So if you dislike someone taking issue with your opinion, ignore it or I guess go elsewhere. We discuss things here, you should know this.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 8:00 PM

He eliminated the possibility of anti-Mormonism (at least to his satisfaction) and concluded that Obama’s effort at defining Romney as not in sync with them and their needs made him unacceptable to them and convinced them to sit out. Had those efforts been unsuccessful, Romney SHOULD have had enough votes to win.

SCSoxFan on November 8, 2012 at 7:57 PM

So effectively Romney got exactly what he and his sycophants did to Newt in the Primary? LOL, if true, it makes me happier for his loss.

It does not fit my theory though.

astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Overall, the GOP needs to stop nominating ball-less nerds. Like it or not, the race for the Presidency has become a pop-culture popularity contest (among swing voters). Swing voters are complete idiots. This needs to be taken into account.

WhatSlushfund on November 8, 2012 at 8:00 PM

And shame on all of you for piling on more after he and Ryan fought hard to help undo what Obama foisted upon us. You’re just continuing the left’s work for them, free. Ever think they WANT us divided? This absolutely disgusts me.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

This times a million.

JPeterman on November 8, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Does not a single one of you stop to consider the fact that 2008 was just a bigger, more sensationalist election that drew the attention of far more “registered voters” and “adults” than did this election?

I understand that to political junkies who lean right this was a momentous election for you and that YOU had a great deal of enthusiasm. But political junkies and “passionate about politics” people of any stripe are a huge minority in America.

People just didn’t care as much. They haven’t been satisfied with the last 4 years but most recognize Barack Obama is not the anti-Christ, thief in the night, just waiting for his perfect moment to pull out the goose stepping fascist jackboots on the helpless American people, as AM advertising salesmen conservatives has wailed and gnashed at the teeth about since before he was even President. They didn’t hate Mitt Romney or think he would have been terrible, but he also wasn’t very inspiring, was still running on the same 30 year old republican platform, and he was the head of a party that had just spent 4 years playing tantrum child.

It didn’t really matter to as many people. If Obama won it wasn’t gonna break their hearts. It Romney won it wasn’t gonna break their hearts.

Many people avoid giving a damn about politics because they realize it’s just a bs game of tear each other down so nobody can ever get anything done. Many people believed 2008 was different. Hope and change and all that. Maybe this time it REALLY happens and our government can be worth a damn.

This time, you might consider that maybe 3 million people that voted last time just didn’t care as much this time, and consider if maybe their “just as logical and working as yours” brain might have been able to find a good reason to feel that way, given the history of “American Politics”, that shining beacon on the hill.

Boomer_Sooner on November 8, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Wino on November 8, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Hey, I’m tired of voting for a candidate just because I can’t stand who is in office currently, myself. But I will tell you that Mitt would have revived the economy a hell of a lot more than Obama has or will.

There are many other things about Romney that I wasn’t thrilled with. I didn’t vote for him in the primary. As far as I’m concerned the entire primary field was a bit weak. But I’m not going to sit at home and hold my vote just to let a full-throated Marxist walk off with a win without a fight.

You did. That’s your option. And as far as the person I work with, she NEVER participates, and that’s what I was talking about. Try to read more thoroughly.

predator on November 8, 2012 at 8:02 PM

I think it is time for people who voted to verify that their ballot stub was counted.

huntingmoose on November 8, 2012 at 8:02 PM

I think this was Obama plan the whole time. 85% of his ad buys were negative. Lies and ugly slanders. He managed to disgust enough people they simply refused to be apart of the process. Couple that with media narrative and their push that an Obama win was inevitable, it allowed him to eek out a small victory with just his base, the moochers and the people who are susceptible to lies and demagoguery. It was their master plan and it worked. Had those 8-10 million voters shown up, they likely would have broke for Romney as undecideds usually so.

It wasn’t a get out the vote effort. It was a suppress the vote effort. And it worked. I dot buy the motion their votes just aren’t counter yet. Do we usually call elections with 10 million votes not counted?

jawkneemusic on November 8, 2012 at 8:02 PM

And I think that it is incredibly hypocritical that posters here are promoting him while criticizing Obama for the same vapidness… m’kay.

Illinidiva on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Sweet Jesus. Seriously…Marco Rubio. Vapid.
If this is conservatism, I’m out. You’re cannibals.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Bee, pay no attention to the man thing behind the curtain. The would-be diva is the Lizard of Oz. She’s not what she represents herself to be.

hillbillyjim on November 8, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Wino on November 8, 2012 at 7:59 PM

Bob Dole was not that bad…

astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 8:02 PM

[Palin's] the Barack Obama/parallel universe of the Conservative movement…..with the opposite media attention.

PappyD61 on November 8, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Good one! At least Barky can be bothered to actually run for office and hold it when he’s elected.

cool breeze on November 8, 2012 at 8:03 PM


No blame to Romney. He did the best possible that a moderate can do.

The results just drove the last nail in the coffin that a moderate can win.

we need true conservatives

huntingmoose on November 8, 2012 at 8:03 PM

TXUS on November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Excellent comment. I fully agree.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Wino on November 8, 2012 at 7:59 PM

Please save your feeble excuses for why you didn’t vote. The fact is that sometimes you have to go with the lesser of two evils. So you are telling me that if given a choice in voting for someone who is not conservative enough for you, or someone who will be a complete disaster for the country, you won’t vote at all? That’s a good plan. Just don’t vote. That will cure all of our problems.

bandutski on November 8, 2012 at 8:06 PM

And shame on all of you for piling on more after he and Ryan fought hard to help undo what Obama foisted upon us. You’re just continuing the left’s work for them, free. Ever think they WANT us divided? This absolutely disgusts me.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

This times a million.

JPeterman on November 8, 2012 at 8:01 PM

He did not one thing to undo what Obama has done. He made promises to do so which in the ears of many rang untrue in the face of his past actions.
You were warned he was not electable last year.
Those who made him our nominee have far more to be shamed for.

astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 8:06 PM

I don’t like calling people racists but her posts these past few days have really focused on Rubio and his race and really hateful.

terryannonline on November 8, 2012 at 7:56 PM

She, or whatever it is, is being deceitful, and has been from the get.

I’m putting it on my ignore list; I would recommend everyone do the same. The diva is only about stirring the pot. It is painfully obvious by now, though many of us tried to correspond intelligently with the being to which we’re referring.

Who knows if it’s a she or a he? More importantly, who cares? It has proven itself to be an instigator, a troublemaker, a hate-monger and worse.

That’s all I need to know.

God Bless all of you.

hillbillyjim on November 8, 2012 at 8:06 PM

hillbillyjim on November 8, 2012 at 8:02 PM

I’m afraid. :(

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 8:06 PM

The problem is the people running the GOP (and I am not talking about a RINO problem). Republican strategists are all about making commercials; Democratic strategists are about getting people to vote and winning elections they should lose.

bw222 on November 8, 2012 at 7:30 PM

This is, I think, a major part of it. Stale thinking.

Hypothetical: “Hey Romney/Obama campaign, you’ve just been given $5 million dollars. What will you do with it?

Obama: “We’ll use it to put 100,000 people on the street knocking on doors to get out the vote.”

Romney: “We’ll use it to cut a TV ad that no one will watch because they’ll just fast forward on their DVRs.”

AngusMc on November 8, 2012 at 8:07 PM

Evangelicals stayed home too because they see Romney’s ‘cult’ as worse than their own.

Corporal Tunnel on November 8, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Nope. You’re wrong about that.

“Evangelicals turned out in record numbers and voted as heavily for Mitt Romney yesterday as they did for George W. Bush in 2004,” said Ralph Reed, chairman of Faith and Freedom Coalition. “That is an astonishing outcome that few would have predicted even a few months ago. But Romney underperformed with younger voters and minorities and that in the end made the difference for Obama.”

Reed added that the election was a “tale of two cities” and said, “Evangelicals and faithful Catholics turned out in large numbers and voted overwhelmingly for religious liberty, the sanctity of life and marriage, and limited government. But younger voters and minorities turned out in even larger numbers [than] in 2008 and delivered Obama to victory.”

Overall, not factoring religion or faith, Obama easily won the youth vote nationally, 67 percent to 30 percent.

The evangelical vote increased in 2012 to a record 27 percent of the electorate. This was the highest share of the vote in modern political history for evangelicals, according to the FFC.

Solaratov on November 8, 2012 at 8:07 PM

Good one! At least Barky can be bothered to actually run for office and hold it when he’s elected.

cool breeze on November 8, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Palin’s still standing, Romney not so much..:)

idesign on November 8, 2012 at 8:08 PM

And, regarding the lectures on conservatism? lol What exactly do you think you’re doing here yourself? erm…opining about conservatism, correct? So if you dislike someone taking issue with your opinion, ignore it or I guess go elsewhere. We discuss things here, you should know this.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Opining is one thing, Bee, but you’re the one sounding divisive with your scolding little rants. And I don’t need ‘em. You want to banter opinions? Fine. That’s not what you were doing. You were preaching, and I don’t need it. I know we discuss things here. I’ve been here a long time. I didn’t lecture. I put forth my view, and you came out with “disturbingly divisive” spew. That is not challenging an opinion. That’s lecturing. You want to lecture? Become a professor. Preach? Join the ministry.

predator on November 8, 2012 at 8:08 PM

Solaratov on November 8, 2012 at 8:07 PM

Maybe the young have figured out the only way they have a future of being free requires the failure of the nation to get rid of the slavery of Social Security taxes being placed on them?

astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 8:09 PM

So you are telling me that if given a choice in voting for someone who is not conservative enough for you…

bandutski on November 8, 2012 at 8:06 PM

He wasn’t conservative at all.

Mitt Romney “My views are progressive

sharrukin on November 8, 2012 at 8:09 PM

TXUS on November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Great post! Got any names in mind for 2016..?

d1carter on November 8, 2012 at 8:09 PM

As things are lookin’..
I can cancel my Greek vacation next year and just open my front door…

Electrongod on November 8, 2012 at 7:58 PM

I’m afraid that the African safari I’d planned for next year might just play out on my front yard.

TXUS on November 8, 2012 at 8:10 PM

I believe Rush put it like this today (re imperfect candidates in a crucial time): if you have cancer, do you go for the immediate 70% chance of a cure readily available, or do you hold out for the 100% cure to be developed?

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 8:10 PM

I believe Rush put it like this today (re imperfect candidates in a crucial time): if you have cancer, do you go for the immediate 70% chance of a cure readily available, or do you hold out for the 100% cure to be developed?

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 8:10 PM

If you have an incurable disease, do you pass it onto your children?

astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 8:11 PM

That said, and in retrospect, had our super-pacs fought back against the negative picture that was being painted of Romney for those many months before the convention where he couldn’t spend money, with positive ads showing him not to be a monster, it might’ve helped stint the slide.

This^

Republican super pac super smart. Also Mitt had to have some cash left after the primaries.

jukin3 on November 8, 2012 at 8:11 PM

predator on November 8, 2012 at 8:08 PM

Who’s preaching now?

I was heated. I AM heated. No apologies. Just who I am. :)

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 8:11 PM

I’ll tell you where they went. They went to their sofas, or turbo tax or cleaned out the garage. No science needed. There was nothing new to vote for. It was another grey suit, from another company meeting that you have been to 90 times and have 90 copies of the same notes from. They stayed home because Barry’s America wasn’t as scary as the same crap from ’88.

Limerick on November 8, 2012 at 8:12 PM

He did not one thing to undo what Obama has done. He made promises to do so which in the ears of many rang untrue in the face of his past actions.
You were warned he was not electable last year.
Those who made him our nominee have far more to be shamed for.

astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Unlike you, I don’t kick honest people who worked their behinds off on our behalf, in the butt when they are down.

JPeterman on November 8, 2012 at 8:12 PM

@ingrahamangle

Until GOP comes to terms w/ how corrosive certain GWB policies were to the GOP &conservatism (brought us Obama), we’ll continue to lose WH.

Yeah, i think we need to talk about this. The bush tax cuts took a load of people off the tax rolls…not really good strategy.

bush had no finesse. immigration, SS reform, medicare D, affordable housing

no response to horrid vicious attacks…VP would could not be party leader once term was over.

how about that for a start Laura?

r keller on November 8, 2012 at 8:12 PM

If you have an incurable disease, do you pass it onto your children?

astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 8:11 PM

lol It already has been. We’re trying to cure it. Hence the analogy.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Doesn’t really matter if we run a true Conservative or moderate, if he fails at effectively conveying the Conservative message, he still loses.

tkyang99 on November 8, 2012 at 8:13 PM

This Whitey is done. Done with the ‘can’t spill pee out of a boot if the instructions were printed on the bottom’ Republican party – that I never cared for much to begin with, and who let government grow under all of their watches….and hell – “let”? Encouraged!

It’s over. Just heard a communist hispanic on LA radio talking about how Romney would have won if it weren’t for them, and how they are working the amnesty beat hard now – and why not? Who of our brave homeland loving R’s will protect us? LOL. The R’s are already talking some Statue of Liberty play using amnesty to win these people over. RNC is delusional, and liars. About 10% are conservatives at heart. You think Mitch McConnell cares about the size of gov? Boehner? Please. Those are your leaders….sad sad sad.

Whites – it’s over. The best you can do is speed up the decline. Starve the beast of cash, and use as many services as possible. Tell em your a minority if needed. Scream racist if they ask you to prove it. Cloward-Piven and Alinsky cut both ways. They want a welfare state. I plan on exploiting the hell out of it.

The longer til the collapse, the stronger and more invasive the coming surveillance/police state will be, and the more cash that will be extracted from you. And let’s face it – DC views YOU as the problem. They will make your life difficult. If you have to fill out a form for the gov., will checking the “White” box help or hurt you? Nuff said.

After the collapse we can rebuild. It’s over now.

Kungfoochimp on November 8, 2012 at 8:13 PM

I believe Rush put it like this today (re imperfect candidates in a crucial time): if you have cancer, do you go for the immediate 70% chance of a cure readily available, or do you hold out for the 100% cure to be developed?

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 8:10 PM

Yeah I heard that but it’s a backwards analogy to what is going on in Washington.

bgibbs1000 on November 8, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Unlike you, I don’t kick honest people who worked their behinds off on our behalf, in the butt when they are down.

JPeterman on November 8, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Exactly. Thank you.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 8:14 PM

And shame on all of you for piling on more after he and Ryan fought hard to help undo what Obama foisted upon us. You’re just continuing the left’s work for them, free. Ever think they WANT us divided? This absolutely disgusts me.

Bee on November 8, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I VOTED for the man! Just like I did McCain, but I didn’t think either of them were strong enough in the campaign. The Democrats throw darts, and McCain and Mitt both returned fire with nerf balls, in my opinion. Romney had a huge advantage after the first debate then failed to go for the jugular.

The election is over, and now we’re dividing the party? I defended him pre-election. Where were you when the other folks here who were bad mouthing Romney were spouting their crap? That’s when there were people here trying to divide the party/movement/whatever. You’re a little late on this one.

predator on November 8, 2012 at 8:14 PM

No blame to Romney. He did the best possible that a moderate can do.

The results just drove the last nail in the coffin that a moderate can win.

we need true conservatives

huntingmoose on November 8, 2012 at 8:03 PM

.
Wrong.
Class Warfare won.
Food Stamps won.
Taxing the Rich won.
Racial Minorities won.

There is no conservative solution for any of that.
4 more years of what we just went thru strengthens there position further.
This is the new,transformed America we will be living in.

2016 will bring Shillary and a hispanic into the WH. Nothing can stop that, except a depression.

FlaMurph on November 8, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Please save your feeble excuses for why you didn’t vote. The fact is that sometimes you have to go with the lesser of two evils. So you are telling me that if given a choice in voting for someone who is not conservative enough for you, or someone who will be a complete disaster for the country, you won’t vote at all? That’s a good plan. Just don’t vote. That will cure all of our problems.

Here’s the real kicker(s): I worked my first GOP candidate when I was 11 years old. I voted for every GOP candidate since Reagan, except when I was overseas before getting a ballot was easy. I’m a veteran (8 years). I work in the oil industry, and have for 24 years.

And I sat out this vote. I can’t speak for the other 7,999,999 people who sat out, but I know why I did. I even came onto Hotair saying exactly what I’m saying now LOOKING for a reason to vote for Romney.

What I got was a bunch of crap just like I’m getting now. Good to see that the plan for 2016 is to elect an electable candidate just like in 2008 and 2012.

How’s that working out for you? (in my best Dr. Phil voice)

Wino on November 8, 2012 at 8:15 PM

There’s so much about the GOP/conservative response to these election results that *screams* about the power of feeling like you’re in the majority, about the emotional wage of believing the nation is oriented to serve your interests. So many white Americans have never felt that way before. I think the next 4 years are going to be extremely interesting.

libfreeordie on November 8, 2012 at 8:16 PM

[Palin's] the Barack Obama/parallel universe of the Conservative movement…..with the opposite media attention.

PappyD61 on November 8, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Good one! At least Barky can be bothered to actually run for office and hold it when he’s elected.

cool breeze on November 8, 2012 at 8:03 PM

I thought Obama said you can’t change Washington from the inside? I guess if he really believed that though he wouldn’t have run for a 2nd term.

We can only hope he is just as pre-occupied with the celebrity role of the Presidency and gets bored and spends the next 4 years on Vacay with Michelle, Beyonce and Jay-Z.

Palin is 2008 and a non-factor at this point.

She had her chance and she decided she’d rather be on television and post on FB. At least she’s not soiled with the filth of the republican party leadership and their compromising.

PappyD61 on November 8, 2012 at 8:16 PM

Kungfoochimp on November 8, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Seek help.

hillbillyjim on November 8, 2012 at 8:16 PM

I personally think something is fishy. I have never bought into “voter fraud” claims that would significantly alter the elections outcome – till now.

There is no way you can tell me 8 million voters stayed home, not with the enthusiasm the crowds that Romney was getting and not with the very clear and well defined differences between Obama and Romney and surely not with Obama’s 4 year record of failures. Romney getting less than McCain – that is hogwash and smells of voter fraud to no end.

I honestly think something is fishy and I truly wish someone would do an investigation into massive voter fraud, I think our election has been rigged and stolen.

bzip on November 8, 2012 at 7:26 PM

I agree 100% but there will be no investigation that we will ever hear about. The ruling class through their media are already trying to convince everyone that Romney’s voters just decided not to show up.

bgibbs1000 on November 8, 2012 at 7:40 PM

I agree as well. Another point of anecdotal evidence, -they could not steal the House. They can’t steal the House because the dem vote spigots in the big cities can’t affect House races out in the boonies. They can only be used to steal statewide races, ie Senate and Presidential races.

Obama got 11 million less voters because people rejected his policies. Just where did those people go?
They should have gone to the republican win column.

in the last 4 presidential elections the voting totals have increased 7% each year. This year they are down 11%

It only takes a few key suburban counties in a few key swing states to flip…

you do the math

audiotom on November 8, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Thank you, this is a key point to reverse-engineering what happened. Critics say, “well, Obama lost 8 million voters too, where did they go?” The answer, -this time they were Romney votes that got discarded somewhere along the way. Something about their mechanism allowed them to discard Romney votes but not change them to little Bammie. That’s a clue.

slickwillie2001 on November 8, 2012 at 8:16 PM

He did not one thing to undo what Obama has done. He made promises to do so which in the ears of many rang untrue in the face of his past actions.
You were warned he was not electable last year.
Those who made him our nominee have far more to be shamed for.
astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 8:06 PM

And which one of the primary candidates would you have chosen, that you believe would have performed better since you were so sure Mitt was the wrong choice between them last year and doled out “warnings”?

Boomer_Sooner on November 8, 2012 at 8:16 PM

My husband has been unemployed for 2 1/2 yrs now. He is a master electrician forced to be in da Union. They currently have a 72% unemployment rate in my area. In the past I have been very generous in my giving. I did Glenn Beck’s Christmas Jar for the past 3 years, and gave to disaster relief, etc. I hate to say it, but now that zero has won re-election and there is no hope of employement for my husband, I’ll be keeping the Christmas Jar for my family this year. I will also stop giving to any charity I think will go to those who voted for zero. I. Am. Done. I must now adopt the selfishness I despise in others. I am all about me and my family, and a big “Screw YOU” to anybody who voted for this disaster.

Sasha List on November 8, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 7