Poll: Romney got a smaller share of the Mormon vote than Bush did?

posted at 6:36 pm on November 9, 2012 by Allahpundit

Only slightly smaller, but still.

At the Corner, they’re wondering whether these numbers were skewed by the fact that Utah and Idaho weren’t exit-polled this year. I don’t think so. There were no intensive exit polls of those states individually, but the people responsible for the comprehensive national exit poll said a few months ago that they’d include voters from all 50 in that one. Mormons in Utah should be represented.

Shocking or no, then? I wouldn’t have guessed that the first Mormon nominee might keep pace with Bush among evangelicals (and far outpace McCain) while slipping a bit with members of his own faith. But maybe Bush simply maxed out the Mormon vote in 2004, possibly due to the greater focus on social issues in the campaign that year or possibly due to a better GOTV effort. Or, more likely, maybe the same demographic forces that are affecting the rest of the country are affecting Mormons too. We’re talking about a small shift here, from 80% backing for Bush to 78% for Mitt, but there might now be enough of a “generation gap” between older and younger Mormons to account for that:

“A lot of younger Mormons—those born in the last twenty years—really grew up in that environment,” says Bowman. “They feel at home in America. While their parents tend to be social conservatives, these younger people are less so. They are more culturally comfortable in the United States, and many of them tend to be more liberal.”…

As president of the student chapter of BYU’s Political Affairs Society, David Romney says Mormons have a “wide variety of political views.” From what he observes on campus, there are many young people on both sides of the spectrum who want to get involved in the political sphere. “But having a Mormon running for president is not shaping those people’s views.”

Back in May, RCP noted a “significant subsection of younger, liberal-leaning church members who are emphatic supporters of Obama and who cannot relate to Romney as a politician, despite their shared faith.” For a mirror image of that, consider that having Joe Lieberman on the ticket as the first Jewish VP nominee didn’t do much for Gore in 2000 with Jewish voters. Bush earned 19% of the Jewish vote that year, which was actually a few points better than the 16% Bob Dole took in 1996 and the measly 11% George H.W. Bush received in 1992. Obama has increased Democrats’ share of the black vote but only by a few points; it was already stratospheric, exceeding 90% in some elections in the past. Point being, I’m not at all sure why people believe that nominating someone from a particular racial/ethnic/religious group will meaningfull increase the party’s support among that group, a lesson the GOP should bear in mind before coronating Rubio as a silver-bullet approach to solving their problem with Latino voters. In fact, PPP (the most accurate state pollster of the election) polled a hypothetical Romney/Rubio ticket in Florida back in May. Result: Not only didn’t Rubio outperform other potential VP nominees, he actually caused Romney to lose two points when added to the ticket. Romney’s share of the Latino vote in that poll went from 37% without Rubio on the ticket to … 37% with him on it. Not a surprise, if you believe that Latino voters skew Democratic on policy. Maybe all of that would change if Rubio suddenly achieved historic status as the first Latino major party nominee. But maybe not.

Anyway, I think the more amazing result here isn’t that Mitt slid a tiny bit with Mormon voters from 2004, it’s that he didn’t slide with evangelicals. Presumably they’re subject to the same “generation gap” dynamic as Mormons are. What happened?


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

There have been problems with military absentee ballots this entire election season. You’ll see in one article that the ballots sent to our troops in Afghanistan burned up in a crash. It’s an outrage.

http://www.examiner.com/article/cast-aside-thousands-of-votes-from-our-military-troops-uncounted-or-missing

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/26/absentee-ballots-destroyed-in-crash

http://mvpproject.org/in-the-news/va-military-absentee-ballots-going-awol-in-2012/

TarheelBen on November 9, 2012 at 7:44 PM

WHAT I THINK, TOO.

The military vote this election was largely rendered moot. Lost ballots, undelivered ballots, yaddayaddayadda…Patraeus resigning today…yaddayadddayadda…the military vote was almost certainly NOT INCLUDED in this week’s election results.

I’m relatively certain that that’s a given, that the military vote was mostly excluded.

Lourdes on November 9, 2012 at 7:50 PM

2000 7% increase over 1996
2004 19% increase over 2000
2008 7% increase over 2004
2012 11% decrease over 2008!

Um, yeah, right.

mitchellvii on November 9, 2012

Thanks for posting those figures. I’d been meaning to look them up myself.

Not only do we have to account for 2-3 million missing McCain ’08 voters, but that number of voters that would have showed up over 2008 levels due the natural growing of the electorate.

If fraud it is indeed that turned this election, it’s those missing GOP voters we need to focus on. We all know massive fraud took place to increase Dem numbers, it’s what was likely done to “disappear” Romney voters that’s the question.

Saying that certain groups of Republican, Right-leaning and Independent disgruntled or apathetic voters stayed home doesn’t account for it- people stay home during each election for various reasons.

We had a landslide GOP victory in 2010, there was just not one single thing or any number of things that could account for the suppression of that enthusiasm to a degree that would account for millions of missing votes this time around.

Let’s all make a vow to stay on top of this. We know that not even Right wing media outlets will cover this so it’s up to us.

sartana on November 9, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Limbaugh had one of you condescending right-wing conservative know-it-alls who refused to vote for Romney call into his show the other day. I was pleasantly surprised at how he handled “Ken.” He clearly thought the guy should have sucked it up and voted to get Obama out of office, regardless of his misgivings about Romney and the “Republican establishment.”

This business about “sending a message” to the so-called party elites by not voting for their “hand-picked” RINO candidate is so ridiculous it’s pathological. Do you really think you’re THAT important?

And so now we have all the usual suspects talking about how the Republican Party would have won with a TrueCon–like the utterly laughable Sarah Palin. Please, get over yourselves, stop living in a state of delusion. You have to live in the world as it is, not as you would like it to be.

You’re the rightwing equivalent of the Obamabots who think Barry is the Second Coming. Ten percent on each extreme of the political spectrum who are dropdead ideologues.

As for Ron Paul, he’s as laughable as Palin. Neither will ever, ever, EVER win a national election.

Obama was an incumbent POTUS promising freebies and determined to use–as he always has–character assassination to defeat his opponent. And he’s black. He was always going to be near-impossible to defeat.

Romney did as well as anyone could under the circumstances. A TrueCon not only would not have won this time, but considering how the country has changed, has no chance of winning in the future.

Meredith on November 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

. What happened?

Fraud.

JPeterman on November 9, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Obama got “108 percent of total votes” in one Ohio county alone!

Imagine that.

/ end Pollyanna voice.

Lourdes on November 9, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Limbaugh had one of you condescending right-wing conservative know-it-alls who refused to vote for Romney call into his show the other day. I was pleasantly surprised at how he handled “Ken.” He clearly thought the guy should have sucked it up and voted to get Obama out of office, regardless of his misgivings about Romney and the “Republican establishment.”

This business about “sending a message” to the so-called party elites by not voting for their “hand-picked” RINO candidate is so ridiculous it’s pathological. Do you really think you’re THAT important?

And so now we have all the usual suspects talking about how the Republican Party would have won with a TrueCon–like the utterly laughable Sarah Palin. Please, get over yourselves, stop living in a state of delusion. You have to live in the world as it is, not as you would like it to be.

You’re the rightwing equivalent of the Obamabots who think Barry is the Second Coming. Ten percent on each extreme of the political spectrum who are dropdead ideologues.

As for Ron Paul, he’s as laughable as Palin. Neither will ever, ever, EVER win a national election.

Obama was an incumbent POTUS promising freebies and determined to use–as he always has–character assassination to defeat his opponent. And he’s black. He was always going to be near-impossible to defeat.

Romney did as well as anyone could under the circumstances. A TrueCon not only would not have won this time, but considering how the country has changed, has no chance of winning in the future.

Meredith on November 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Well said. By you and Limbaugh.

Palin nor Paul would have won. IN fact, they’d have done so much worse than Romney.

The Right has it’s factions, too. Some people just never learn.

Lourdes on November 9, 2012 at 7:54 PM

I’m relatively certain that that’s a given, that the military vote was mostly excluded.

Lourdes on November 9, 2012 at 7:50 PM

And it would have gone about 65-70% for Romney. Besides those links above, I read numerous articles about our government dragging its feet and failing to get ballots mailed out in time. This didn’t happen in 2008. Was it intentional? Probably.

TarheelBen on November 9, 2012 at 7:55 PM

davidk on November 9, 2012 at 7:12 PM

Look, I’m more moderate, but I’d totally be behind Rand Paul, Bobby Jindal, Susana Martinez, even Marco Rubio. Will they run? Who knows. It’s certainly disheartening to hear, after that primary we had, where the voters chose Mitt (and really folks, did you not vote in the primary??), to hear they didn’t come out for him. So frankly any who stayed home have no right to complain now. None. Nada.

Annietxgrl on November 9, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Is anyone going to investigate this election? There are just so many irregularities. Is this not going to be looked into by anyone?

Voter from WA State on November 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

I’ll admit it, I EXPECTED there to be a lot of voter fraud. It goes on in every election mostly by the Left and is getting worse, as they are, over the years. What I’ve seen in my own locale by Democrats is beneath contempt but they continue to engage in it and it gets worse with every election.

No one will ever go back over an election and “redo” the results, regardless of fraud that is discovered afterward. There is not the apparatus nor will to do it, not that I’m not willing.

I wrote a week before last Tuesday that we’d hear of voter fraud a few months after the election and so we’re hearing about it in only days afterward. We will surely be hearing of much worse fraud, too.

Lourdes on November 9, 2012 at 7:58 PM

The republican party needs to tack WAY towards libertarianism if it wants to win. The country does not want social conservative crap anymore. Of course, the stupid GOP will take this election and just grab some minority to run in 2016 thinking that they can just point to his slightly browner skin and be like, “Hey other minority people, look at what we got here” and get their votes. The GOP is pathetic. They better PRAY that Rand Paul decides to run in 2016, and actually runs FOR something instead of just against the status quo. Of course the stupid social cons will probably torpedo his nomination during the primaries, because they are the cancer of the Republican Party at this point.

thphilli on November 9, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Time for species replacement, Republican party old and broken, Conservative party new and on message. With some backbone.

Speakup on November 9, 2012 at 8:01 PM

I’m relatively certain that that’s a given, that the military vote was mostly excluded.

Lourdes on November 9, 2012 at 7:50 PM

And it would have gone about 65-70% for Romney. Besides those links above, I read numerous articles about our government dragging its feet and failing to get ballots mailed out in time. This didn’t happen in 2008. Was it intentional? Probably.

TarheelBen on November 9, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Yes, it was intentional and that’s what I was implying in my 7:50 comments. Yes, the military vote would have gone for ROmney by high majority. Yes, it was intentionally excluded from results, by one Leftwing crook or another.

Even MY locale USPS delayed my receipt of my Absentee Balllot and a psychotic employee there went ballistic when I went to pick it up and pointed out what they’d done. This was the second national election in which they “held” my mail and the only two times in history that they have, when there was an Absentee Ballot in the mail.

What can be done about that? THERE IS NO ONE in the USPS employ who is responsible for that. NO ONE is answerable for it. The Left does what it does by one ballot after another because they can get away with it and it’s only getting worse.

Lourdes on November 9, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Meredith on November 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Count me as one who thought Palin should have run. Your condescension is noted.

But I did vote for Romney.

But the Republican Party has shown it cares not one whit about the conservative ideology, so they will no longer get my vote.

Rant on that.

davidk on November 9, 2012 at 8:02 PM

I have only anecdotal evidence here, but I used to live in Utah and still have family and friends there, and heard a lot on FB.

Utah was a guaranteed win for Romney, so many went the third party route as a protest against major parties (which was true when I lived there; in 1992, Perot came in second, ahead of Clinton). The Libertarian vote (5700 votes) was enough to cost Mia Love the seat in UT-4.

Among many liberal Mormons, Romney wasn’t just opposed, he was HATED. They called him a phony, a bad Mormon, dishonest, evil, heartless, yadda yadda. Many conservative Mormons weren’t fond of him for his positions, but I didn’t see many attacking his character the way liberal Mormons have.

sulla on November 9, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Harry Reid

unclesmrgol on November 9, 2012 at 8:03 PM

My neighbor was a Ron Paul guy and he wrote in Ron Paul (or didn’t vote for pres at all – can’t remember) because he didn’t think there was that much difference between the two. I tried to sway him last week, but no go. Btw, I saw that Romney got the white 18-29 male block by about 5%. My nephew was one of those. Bottom line, it wasn’t lack of Latino vote, it was lack of the white vote and his screwed up GOTV mechanism.

TxAnn56 on November 9, 2012 at 8:06 PM

P.S. I heard Allen West on Glenn Beck today and he was up by 300 votes so far. He said there were alot of discrepances in St. Lucia (Lucy?) Has anyone heard anything else? Let’s pray he holds on. We need his voice.

TxAnn56 on November 9, 2012 at 8:08 PM

P.S. I heard Allen West on Glenn Beck today and he was up by 300 votes so far. He said there were alot of discrepances in St. Lucia (Lucy?) Has anyone heard anything else? Let’s pray he holds on. We need his voice.

TxAnn56 on November 9, 2012 at 8:08 PM

Sounds like Lucy has a whole lot of splainin’ to do.

davidk on November 9, 2012 at 8:10 PM

Palin nor Paul would have won. IN fact, they’d have done so much worse than Romney.

Thanks for the laugh- You forget more people voted for McLame/Palin than did for Romney/Ryan.

I didn’t vote for Juan, I voted for Palin and against Obama.

Mitt was a good solid guy who at first I had misgivings about but warmed up too, Ryan was an excellent choice out of the box. I was happy to vote for him.

Put me in the fraud column as well, I have seen enough of it here in CT to know it happens and the numbers in a lot of places don’t add up.

gdonovan on November 9, 2012 at 8:15 PM

Yes, it was intentional and that’s what I was implying in my 7:50 comments. Yes, the military vote would have gone for ROmney by high majority. Yes, it was intentionally excluded from results, by one Leftwing crook or another.

Even MY locale USPS delayed my receipt of my Absentee Balllot and a psychotic employee there went ballistic when I went to pick it up and pointed out what they’d done. This was the second national election in which they “held” my mail and the only two times in history that they have, when there was an Absentee Ballot in the mail.

What can be done about that? THERE IS NO ONE in the USPS employ who is responsible for that. NO ONE is answerable for it. The Left does what it does by one ballot after another because they can get away with it and it’s only getting worse.

Lourdes on November 9, 2012 at 8:02 PM

The post office is run by just another greedy union. They KNOW that under a Republican administration they are not likely to get bailed out when the time comes.

This is what happens when post offices, cops, firemen, utility workers, health care workers, etc, are allowed to unionize.

I expect the day will come when you call 911 and someone somewhere will check a handy computer listing to see your political affiliation and donation history before responding.

slickwillie2001 on November 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM

I just don’t buy it. It doesn’t seem credible or pass the smell test.

Mimzey on November 9, 2012 at 8:21 PM

Limbaugh had one of you condescending right-wing conservative know-it-alls who refused…..

Meredith on November 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Thanks for being so divisive. You sowed the seeds and instead of growing grass roots you grew a field of sour grapes.

SparkPlug on November 9, 2012 at 8:21 PM

davidk on November 9, 2012 at 7:03 PM

This. Obama Santa Claus is it. The Free Sh!t Army got Obama elected.

The exit polls are crap.

They’ve been cooked up to create a certain narrative to legitimize this obviously fraudulent election and mold public opinion to accept what’s coming down the pike.

I imagine about 40-50 percent of reported news stories are not actual news at all, but just Psy-Op.

The media is no longer about reporting the facts, but managing perception.

sartana on November 9, 2012 at 7:23 PM

This, too. It is all the MSM has ever been about. They just had to hide it better in the past. Now there’s no need to.

PatriotGal2257 on November 9, 2012 at 8:21 PM

You’re the rightwing equivalent of the Obamabots who think Barry is the Second Coming. Ten percent on each extreme of the political spectrum who are dropdead ideologues.

As for Ron Paul, he’s as laughable as Palin. Neither will ever, ever, EVER win a national election.

Obama was an incumbent POTUS promising freebies and determined to use–as he always has–character assassination to defeat his opponent. And he’s black. He was always going to be near-impossible to defeat.

Romney did as well as anyone could under the circumstances. A TrueCon not only would not have won this time, but considering how the country has changed, has no chance of winning in the future.

Meredith on November 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Before I start, I’ll make it clear I voted for Romney despite my mistrust and misgivings about the man.

But you were warned – repeatedly – what would happen if you folks pushed forward with Romney’s nomination during the primaries. It’s becoming increasingly clear that a small but significant chunk of the Republican base simply sat this one out. Romney was never really ahead of Obama, except for brief blips in October, and the signs of trouble were simply ignored. Your plan to replace the Republican base with independents obviously failed, given that Romney managed to win them and still lost the election.

It’s unfortunate that the base chose to stay at home, but there you have it. Politics is about the art of the possible, and it’s not possible to win without the base. Throwing temper tantrums after the fact shows you still just don’t get it. You can learn to get along with the Republican base and accept that you’ll have to compromise with them, or you can enjoy being politically irrelevant for the next two or three decades.

Doomberg on November 9, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Among many liberal Mormons, Romney wasn’t just opposed, he was HATED. They called him a phony, a bad Mormon, dishonest, evil, heartless, yadda yadda. Many conservative Mormons weren’t fond of him for his positions, but I didn’t see many attacking his character the way liberal Mormons have.

sulla on November 9, 2012 at 8:02 PM

I’ve known some fellow mormons, both conservative and liberal, who think Orrin Hatch should be excommunicated (I personally think Hatch was too chummy with the murderer of Mary Jo Kopechne, but that doesn’t rise to the level of “evil”).

Alberta_Patriot on November 9, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Romney did as well as anyone could under the circumstances. A TrueCon not only would not have won this time, but considering how the country has changed, has no chance of winning in the future.

Meredith on November 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Umm, yeah. Because after all, the party ran staunch conservatives in 1992, 1996, and 2008 and they were totally shellacked while in 1980 and 1984 the very moderate to liberal Reagan won by a landslide. Oh? You mean Bush I, Dole, and McCain weren’t TruCons? Hmmm, so moderate to liberal Republicans have lost the last two elections, but nobody will vote for TruCons? How do you reconcile the facts of past elections including this one with the fact that a strong conservative hasn’t been nominated since 1984?

AZfederalist on November 9, 2012 at 8:25 PM

And he’s black. He was always going to be near-impossible to defeat.

Game – Set – Match

All Hail the Messiah!

dmann on November 9, 2012 at 8:32 PM

PatriotGal2257 on November 9, 2012 at 8:21 PM

Rush played at least two Christmas songs today to mark little Bammie’s election win.

slickwillie2001 on November 9, 2012 at 8:32 PM

Hmmm…..well, clearly the solution here is to give Mormons amnesty. That’ll fix it.

/sarc

xblade on November 9, 2012 at 8:36 PM

crosspatch on November 9, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Sorry, but you’re wrong. Mormons are overwhelmingly Republican, the reason why Salt Lake City votes in Democratic Mayors is because, there aren’t all that many Mormon’s left in Salt Lake City proper. It’s Utah’s sole urban center, and Mormon’s pretty much only go there to visit Temple Square.

Mormon’s in Utah overwhelmingly live in the suburbs surrounding Salt Lake City. Politically, Salt Lake City is a little blue pin prick in a sea of red.

WolvenOne on November 9, 2012 at 8:39 PM

I’m Making A Stand And I Will Not Comply, Disperse Or Disband

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/11/im-making-stand-and-i-will-not-comply.html

M2RB: Kalai

Resist We Much on November 9, 2012 at 8:49 PM

cam2 on November 9, 2012 at 7:48 PM

No problem, was glad to offer what knowledge I could.

Also, as somebody else pointed out, there ARE black Mormons, whom I would guess would vote for Romney far more often than African Americans, but far less often than Caucasian Mormons.

However, because of our, admittedly less than sterling history with African Americans, they aren’t nearly as large a part of our Religion as Hispanic Mormons. We’re working on that, but, historical wounds can take a lot of time to heal.

I focused on Hispanics because they’re probably the single biggest racial minority block within the church. Also, something to keep in mind is that Bush did far better with Hispanics as well, so even if the racial make-up of the church hasn’t changed that much since 2004, that itself could explain it.

Or, it could just be a statistical error. Excluding Utah and Idaho, the two most predominately Mormon states in America, could easily skew the data. Particularly when you consider that Utah and Idaho Mormons tend to run slightly more politically conservative than Mormons in say, Washington state, or New York.

Excluding these states would at least increase the margin of error slightly, and exit polls can already be several points off, as 2004 exit polls demonstrated.

WolvenOne on November 9, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Meredith on November 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Before I start, I’ll make it clear I voted for Romney despite my mistrust and misgivings about the man.

But you were warned – repeatedly – what would happen if you folks pushed forward with Romney’s nomination during the primaries. It’s becoming increasingly clear that a small but significant chunk of the Republican base simply sat this one out. Romney was never really ahead of Obama, except for brief blips in October, and the signs of trouble were simply ignored. Your plan to replace the Republican base with independents obviously failed, given that Romney managed to win them and still lost the election.

It’s unfortunate that the base chose to stay at home, but there you have it. Politics is about the art of the possible, and it’s not possible to win without the base. Throwing temper tantrums after the fact shows you still just don’t get it. You can learn to get along with the Republican base and accept that you’ll have to compromise with them, or you can enjoy being politically irrelevant for the next two or three decades.

Doomberg on November 9, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Well Said

SparkPlug on November 9, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Doomberg on November 9, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Be careful..All the votes have not been counted..You maybe right..But you could be wrong..:)

PS..Did you vote??..:)

Dire Straits on November 9, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Why do I feel like being a conservative is just politically pissing in the wind?

kagai on November 9, 2012 at 9:38 PM

To me, this looks like a tie. Polling numbers are never precise; there is always a margin of error. This looks like that. So much statistical noise.

rogaineguy on November 9, 2012 at 9:43 PM

Here’s my two cents. Being a Utah Mormon I have a little bit of inside knowledge. The fact is that being Mormon doesn’t really make you want to vote in another Mormon, especially in Utah. It’s a fact that most Mormons are conservative, but the Liberal Mormons I know are so stubborn that they detested the fact that Romney is also Mormon (see Harry Ried). So that, I think, is why there wouldn’t be a lot of liberals switching. As for why there would be less conservative Mormon turn out, I have no effing idea. This has been a crappy week.

The Hop on November 9, 2012 at 10:12 PM

PS..Did you vote??..:)

Dire Straits on November 9, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Yep, voted for Romney. I wasn’t an abstainer. I feared Obama far more than Romney.

That said, I’ve also made my feelings clear on why he lost, though I’ll admit I was as deluded as most everyone else by from the optimism coming from the Romney campaign in the prior month.

Doomberg on November 9, 2012 at 10:19 PM

I’m getting sick of all this garbage! Just like the whole “Romney lost the female vote”. Bull! Obama won on race, nothing else, the white vote of every demographic, including women, and probably Mormons as well, voted overwhelmingly for America and her economic success, meaning Romney of course. Non-whites of every demographic voted almost exclusively for Obama, period, you tell me why, ’cause I don’t know.

redhead on November 9, 2012 at 10:31 PM

Unskew those Mormon numbers and Romney actually won 110% of Mormons.

Seriously, though, the margin of error on a small (1-2%) subgroup of an exit poll has to be enormous.

AngusMc on November 9, 2012 at 10:35 PM

An estimated 5-7% of Mormons are black. Do the math.

redhead on November 9, 2012 at 10:37 PM

What happened?

The Dems fixed the election. What did you think?

The Rogue Tomato on November 9, 2012 at 10:39 PM

Doomberg on November 9, 2012 at 10:19 PM

I hear you!!..:)

Dire Straits on November 9, 2012 at 11:05 PM

When does Occam’s Razor start slicing all of these shocking statistics in a different way? That there was some sort of manipulation of votes after the ballots are cast. There’s no way to prove it without a full hand recount, which is why it’s the most foolproof. I don’t know if it did, but it could; and all of the data that keeps coming back that just doesn’t jibe with expectations Monday night given the last 4 years and everything else… it just stays within the realm of possibility for me.

321mdl on November 9, 2012 at 11:50 PM

Well since the Mormons heavily recruit dead people for their religion, I would imagine a lot of those dead Mormons voted for Obama, especially in large population centers.

LevStrauss on November 10, 2012 at 9:28 PM

With regard to the predictable loss of the military vote despite federal laws designed to put things in place so that won’t happen, it must be said again that laws are useless that have no teeth. Who gets punished for this vote loss?

No teeth, no law, especially we the powers that be don’t desire its enforcement.

Chessplayer on November 11, 2012 at 1:12 PM

This business about “sending a message” to the so-called party elites by not voting for their “hand-picked” RINO candidate is so ridiculous it’s pathological. Do you really think you’re THAT important?
Meredith on November 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

If we weren’t important you wouldn’t be *****ing about us, now would you?

Dunedainn on November 11, 2012 at 10:27 PM

You’re the rightwing equivalent of the Obamabots who think Barry is the Second Coming. Ten percent on each extreme of the political spectrum who are dropdead ideologues.

As for Ron Paul, he’s as laughable as Palin. Neither will ever, ever, EVER win a national election.

Obama was an incumbent POTUS promising freebies and determined to use–as he always has–character assassination to defeat his opponent. And he’s black. He was always going to be near-impossible to defeat.

Romney did as well as anyone could under the circumstances. A TrueCon not only would not have won this time, but considering how the country has changed, has no chance of winning in the future.

Meredith on November 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Before I start, I’ll make it clear I voted for Romney despite my mistrust and misgivings about the man.

But you were warned – repeatedly – what would happen if you folks pushed forward with Romney’s nomination during the primaries. It’s becoming increasingly clear that a small but significant chunk of the Republican base simply sat this one out. Romney was never really ahead of Obama, except for brief blips in October, and the signs of trouble were simply ignored. Your plan to replace the Republican base with independents obviously failed, given that Romney managed to win them and still lost the election.

It’s unfortunate that the base chose to stay at home, but there you have it. Politics is about the art of the possible, and it’s not possible to win without the base. Throwing temper tantrums after the fact shows you still just don’t get it. You can learn to get along with the Republican base and accept that you’ll have to compromise with them, or you can enjoy being politically irrelevant for the next two or three decades.

Doomberg on November 9, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Warned about what? Don’t nominate the best candidate or the self-styled base will stay home? The base supports the nominee. You are not the base. You are cultists who stayed home. You are about to find that the party will now move to the left. The 2016 nominee will not be as conservative or as capable as Romney.

The party is not going to nominate anyone who is so daft that she thinks you can have a brokered convention, followed by a 2 month campaign, and still win.

Basilsbest on November 19, 2012 at 6:47 PM

Comment pages: 1 2