Ads or Votes? You Decide

This is a lesson for candidates and organizations who want to win rather than consultants who want to bilk clients for millions in fees:

Judging by the current vote totals, Romney’s nationwide operation fell far short of McCain’s in 2008.  In fact, Romney currently trails McCain by around 2 million votes.  2 million!  That number is mind-boggling.  How did the Republican candidate facing the worst president in modern history manage to get 2 million fewer votes than in 2008? Granted, that number may narrow a bit as more votes are counted, but it’s astonishing that Romney’s votes are even in the neighborhood of McCain’s.


[T]he Republican party establishment’s micro-targeting of voters, from surveying voters to a get-out-the-vote, or GOTV, operation — if you can even call it an operation — was a joke.  Take Colorado, Florida, Ohio, and Virginia, for example.  Had Romney won those states, he would be celebrating victory today.  The media would have you believe that he was trounced there.  That’s not the case. Romney lost all four states — and the presidency — by less than 400,000 votes.  He lost Colorado by 111,000, Florida by 47,000, Ohio by 100,000, and Virginia by 108,000.  That’s it. Romney was locked out of the White House by about 366,000 votes.

Ads versus votes

Now imagine an alternate universe in which the Republican party’s consultants, power brokers, and money men invested in legitimate micro-targeting and GOTV efforts with technology that works (like Gravity. . . not Orca). Instead, millions were spent on endless ads that not only failed to move the needle in the age of TiVo and DVR but will keep the lights on for many TV stations that are less than friendly to the conservative movement.


According to news reports, American Crossroads — by far the best-funded force outside the RNC and the congressional committees — and its affiliates raked in $300 million during the 2012 election cycle.  Imagine if a fraction of that money had been spent on voter identification and GOTV efforts in the states mentioned above. It’s not like it was a secret as to where this election was going to be won or lost. It was a universe of no more than 9 states. Think about just $2M per state invested into GOTV. That’s $18M well spent. Instead, that money now pads the bank accounts of various individuals who, if not already millionaires before this cycle started, certainly are now.

It’s the difference between President Obama and President Romney


  1. Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:02 am | Permalink | Reply

    When someone writes that Obama is the worst president in modern history it tells me they’ve learned nothing from this GOP debacle and still don’t get why a majority of voters reflected him.

    • William Jefferson Jr.
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:08 am | Permalink | Reply

      Well some metrics do support the conclusion he is the “worst” even if you don’t personally agree with the conclusion. What do you mean by “a majority of voters reflected him”?

    • FabianNightmare
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:12 am | Permalink | Reply

      Oh, I don’t think he is just the worst, that is a matter of one’s taste in professional politicians. I do believe that he is the most dangerous president in history, as it regards the constitution and the Republic for which he has such obvious disdain.

    • Posted November 8, 2012 at 12:02 pm | Permalink | Reply

      sigh, autocomplete. Meant to say reelected him.

      My point is that if you are going to start with the premise that Obama is objectively terrible you will never understand why voters chose him. Redstate is probably the biggest echo chamber on the right.

      • Ron
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

        That’s not true about Redstate. I think it’s lost its cache in the movement.

    • live_free290248
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The analysis failed. Obama is not the worst President in modern history, but of course, if you live in the bubble, reality is distorted. This is why Romney got beat, because the things the GOP believes do not measure up to reality.

      • Ron
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

        Both sides live in a bubble. NBC, CBS, ABC exist in a bubble. The NYTimes prints in a bubble. The difference is that our guys are not the ruling elites who have occupied these bastions of liberal orthodoxy. They are in lockstep and brook no dissent. This time they got it right–I’ll give them that about the polls. But their entire history is strewn with deception and repression of truth. Look how they’ve been dealing with Benghazi or the aftermath of the storm, carefully protecting their Chosen One from political harm. Can you blame conservatives for believing their polls are still more of the same, especially when they never broadcast the polls in which Obama fell behind? We got it wrong this time not because we live in a bubble–we don’t, we actually know much more about the left than the left knows about us–but because we
        know they are corrupt and dishonest.

  2. TPK
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:06 am | Permalink | Reply

    Weird – wasn’t it Karl Rove who came up with the “72-Hour Campaign”? In 2002, during the only campaign I ever really worked on, that was all we ever talked about. I remember the first thing the campaign manager told me: “It used to be that, for Democrats, ‘GOTV’ meant ‘Get On The Van’, while for Republicans it meant ‘Get On TV’. Now we know better.”

    Evidently Rove decided that model wouldn’t work this time. Or it’s just that there’s more money involved in doing TV.

  3. William Jefferson Jr.
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:10 am | Permalink | Reply

    Can we have a thread on how unimpressive Rove’s SuperPac was this cycle? All that money and we picked up one battleground state and one Senate seat.

  4. Bob San Diego
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:15 am | Permalink | Reply

    One of the big assumptions was that *every* republican that voted for McCain would vote for Romney.

    Clearly this wasn’t true.

    Someone please give me the profile of the republican that voted for McCain and didn’t vote for Romney, because while there were a whole hell of a lot of them, I can’t figure out what one would look like.

    • stuckinmass
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:20 am | Permalink | Reply

      well no, the assumption was that at least as many Republicans who voted for McCain would show up at the polls!

    • Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:24 am | Permalink | Reply

      My theory only…hard core right wing conservatives stayed home. I think in 08 Romney got the rub as talk radio hated McCain and supported Romney. But the second McCain got the nod they went both barrels for McCain. McCain played their game…he went on Hannity, Levin, Beck, Fox News, etc he played the game. He put up Palin (whom on paper seemed great in reality a disaster) and she MONSTER played the game. And Fox News and Talk Radio support was off the charts.

      2012…Romney was BLASTED from day one. Talk Radio and Fox were in the tank for WHACKO Bachman and Nutball Santorum…because they are hardcores and THEY PLAYED THE GAME. They all caveated “if romney wins we will support him” But as soon as Romney won clear up through the convention and up to the first debate the “support” of Romnmey by Fox and Talk Radio was tepid at best. He was alwasy called not a real conservative, he is running a HORRIBLE campaign, he is not a Reagan Conservative (though i believe Reagan wold hate the GOP of today),, etc etc ect…Romney didn’t play their game. He didn’t go on Beck, Hannity, O’Reilly, Limbauigh and he didn’t bow before the right wingers. And I believe that hafl assed support day in and day out was, as Matthews says, a dog a whistle to conservatives this isn’t the guy. He will do more damage to the conservative moment than if Obama gets and we can stoke the anger and hate another 4 years.

      I think Romney was done in by a MASSIVELY horrid GOTV program, a lack of defense of his business record and next to zero support from the right wing radio.

      I say GOP has to pull back the yoke and get away from the right wingers and talk radio a bit and re-center the party as Regan did as a fiscally conservative party that stands for ethic and morals but also smaller government that isnt here to tell you how to live your life even if we disagree with it. We do that, WE WIN HUGE. That and with a less old, less white flag bearer

      • exe
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:47 am | Permalink

        I don’t know about that. The only thing that is (was) more concerning to a hard-core right wing Republican than Romney’s potentially moderate tendencies is Obama’s socialist tendencies. I think the majority of the super right wing would have voted for a turtle over Obama and likely came out in droves to do so.

        I tend to agree more with another analysis on this blog that more liberal Republicans didn’t show up in places like rural Ohio because they saw neither candidate as a better option. I am truly praying that the cause was not our candidate’s religion…but unfortunately I am unable to rule it out.

      • Ron
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 5:05 pm | Permalink

        Sean Trende is studying this now. He’s zeroing in on those districts in OH that failed to support Romney, districts that usually vote Republican. We’ll know more soon enough. I suspect it was the Santorum supporters who stayed home–social conservatives mostly. I agree the talk show hosts did a lot of damage during the primaries. It was irresponsible the way they assailed Romney. I don’t include Hannity in this, but the others really hit him hard. I think they stirred up a lot of anger out there. Rush is lecturing some of these guys today, but he’s not acknowledging his own part in this debacle.

    • Derclaw86
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:46 am | Permalink | Reply

      Here is my list of possible McCain voters that are not Romney voters. Military personnel and veterans to start with. In Virginia, the one of the most shocking stats is that Romney and Obama SPLIT the military vote. Men and women that were married in 2008, but have become single parents in 2012 probably are another group that may have crossed over to Obama. Elderly voters that went for McCain in 2008 and have died are another group of Romney no-shows. Keep in mind that there were many, many more Obama 2008 voters that did not vote Obama this time and stayed home. However, Obama had such a big lead to start with that he was still able to pull out a win.

    • MikeN
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:50 am | Permalink | Reply

      Seniors, who respected McCain’s military service, and perhaps the Mediscare worked.
      Then you have blue collar workers, who objected to Romney’s corporate raider, ‘not one of us’.
      Southeast Ohio showed big dropoffs.

    • Eric
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:56 am | Permalink | Reply

      I personally know 3 people who voted for McCain but didn’t vote for Romney or Obama this time. They are poor white people who are socially conservative. They attend church off and on (occasionally). The are moderate/populist on economic issues. They told me that Obama and Romney were the same. They don’t care about tax rates. They don’t care about small businesses. They are uneducated as far as having a college degree. They live paycheck to paycheck. All 3 are married. They’re moving in and out of their parents’ home just trying to survive. They bounce around from job to job. They hate wall street and rich people.

      Just look at the exit polls. The % of college-educated people went up. The % of non-college educated people went down. Unmarried up, married down. This is the group who didn’t show up. There also happen to be more of them than in 2008 because median incomes are down since 2008 (as Romney mentioned quite often).

      They distrusted Romney because of his wealth and because he seemed like a liberal Northeastern banker. They don’t like Obama at all either.

      • PeterJ
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

        I think you likely nailed a large part of it. They are people who don’t quite qualify for entitlements and thus have a reason to vote democrat. They aren’t voracious news readers and thus not engaged in current events and especially foreign affairs and defense. They are probably extremely difficult to reach by even the best GOTV effort that doesn’t involve people they know. And they don’t care about taxes because they don’t actually make enough for it to matter. The question is, did they vote for McCain last time or are they perpetual non-voters?

      • Ron
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 5:15 pm | Permalink

        There’s a distinct disconnect between social conservatives and fiscal conservatives. It’s a very iffy and combustible coalition. A lot of poor social conservatives are quite comfortable with big government. They have no quibbles with statist politicians like Huckabee or Santorum. They loved Bush W. But these are precisely the kind of Republican leaders we don’t need in Washington. They only expand government and make it even more liberal in the long run. Bush’s Homeland Security is an example of this.

  5. Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:30 am | Permalink | Reply

    It’s real simple, we needed Marco Rubio instead of Paul Ryan to attract just a few percentage points in every key battleground state as well as every other state. Whites didn’t show up in the force we anticipated, and we didn’t attract anywhere near the hispanic vote we hoped! I love Paul Ryan, great guy…was the right guy to fix the numbers problem we have in every facet of our government but Rubio gets the votes and we win the presidency which should have been Romney’s first and only priority!

  6. William Jefferson Jr.
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:35 am | Permalink | Reply

    A problem for Romney was that although he raised a ton of money it was mostly from big-ticket donors who gave money to the joint RNC/Romney Victory Fund. Romney actually performed poorly with direct contributions to his campaign, because those are capped lower. He always struggled getting the base to cut him small checks. For this reason he had to outsource his GOTV operation to the Victory Fund because that’s where most of the money was.

  7. novahockey
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:51 am | Permalink | Reply

    At a metro station (subway) in the Northern VA area on election night — there was a booth of Obama people offering rides to anyone who need it to get to the polls. i scoffed at the idea. maybe i shouldn’t have.

    • Prescient11
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 11:57 am | Permalink | Reply

      Nova, exactly. In the next several years, we need to use the damn money to buy VANS and get our supporters out in force. And with early voting this needs to be done IMMEDIATELY when it starts.

      Two purposes, having people show up and supporting our auto industry!!!


      Here’s a question, what commenters on here are interested in a true grass roots GOTV, which would start right now. AND I MEAN NOW.

      We all heard how superior this GOTV effort was. Instead, it looks to be a miserable failure. We must change that.

      • novahockey
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

        i wonder how much of it is cultural disconnect. it would NEVER occur to me to seek out a ride to the polls. i can walk or drive easily, as the polling station is in my neighborhood. but if you’re running shuttle service from a metro station that sees thousands of riders a day who live in nearby apartments and might not otherwise vote?

      • Billy Butch
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

        @Prescient11: sign me up. No joke, no BS.

  8. WolvenOne
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 1:02 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Okay, first off, here is what Romney did right.

    Successfully won Independent voters, would’ve won more of them had it not been for Sandy, but credit where its due. Successfully won a larger margin of the white vote than in 2008.

    These two things alone would have won him the presidency, even with the less successful GOTV effort, if it hadn’t been for Hurricane Sandy. Roughly 8-10% of voters made up their minds in the last week of the campaign, the challenger usually wins this group by a wide margin, but instead it was narrowly won by Obama. Basically, Romney ran a magnificent campaign in October, but it was largely undone by the Hurricane and Chris Christies photo op. Had Romney ran just as strong the rest of the year as he did in October, it wouldn’t have mattered, but he just didn’t have the cushion to survive something like Sandy.

    What we need to do better.

    Our Super Pacs NEED to stop wasting money on primaries, so they have the money to bypass the media talking heads and define our candidate early. Romney undid a lot of the early damage in October, but if he hadn’t started out behind October instead would have simply put him way out in front.

    Better get out the vote. Look at how Obama and the democrats kept having Early Voting drives at college campuses. At the time we figured he was wasting his money since young voters were so much less enthused. Instead he used early voting to bypass the enthusiasm gap and turn out young voters in huge numbers. We should adopt this strategy as well, and aim it at our own favored demographics. Hold charity events at churches and in religious communities, and use them to register voters and to turn some of them out early. Same strategy should work in suburbs and any other location we can be reasonably expected to get a bunch of R leaning voters to turn out. I know we keep expecting a lot of our voters to turn out on their own, and this is true to an extent, but anything that bumps up our turnout, even slightly, is well worth the money.

    Taking advantage of early voting also helps us in State Polling. State pollsters after all, now bump people right through the voter screen if they’ve voted early. I met many Republicans in the past few weeks that were convinced Romney couldn’t win because of the State Polls, and I suspect this hurt election day turnout.

    Finally, as painful as its going to be, we NEED to start doing better among Hispanic voters AND young voters. While GOTV can compensate to a fair degree, The Republican parties most reliable voters ARE slowly dying off, they’ve got to be replaced somewhere if we’re going to remain a viable party, and the areas where we can most plausible more improvements are among Hispanics and young voters.

    Basically, for Hispanics, we need to adopt an immigration platform that, while still securing the border, and being tough on illegal immigrants, provides a real pathway to citizenship, towards worker visa status, or ideally a combination of both. More specifically, we need to focus immigration enforcement more towards possible criminals and dangerous individuals, create a path to citizenship for long term working illegal immigrants, and create a worker visa system for illegal immigrants who come and go for seasonal work, but who otherwise haven’t broken the law.

    I know, our base will SCREAM and howl about this, but we cannot afford to let Hispanics become another completely solid democratic voting block like African Americans. We need to be able to count on winning at least 40% of this vote to have a chance in states like New Mexico, Nevada, and California. Winning 40% of Hispanics would also likely turn Colorado back into a reliable red-state. Adopting this sort of platform alone won’t be enough to do it, at least not overnight, but it should at least stem the bleeding.

    As for young voters, we need to identify campuses that may be more friendly towards conservative groups and begin hosting largely apolitical events. We can use them to identify young voters who may be persuadable and start working on them with e-mail, personal correspondence, and possibly invitations to other events.

    Course, having never been involved in anything like this, I’m probably being wildly unrealistic about some of this stuff. Still, in addition to getting out the vote, I’m convinced we need to RECRUIT. We have no idea when the demographic shift is going to stabilize, and we just cannot rely on our traditional voting blocks being able to delivery a victory for us. The only real path we have for continued viability is to peel off one or more of the traditionally democratic voting blocks. Anything less than that is merely stemming the bleeding.

    • WolvenOne
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 1:25 pm | Permalink | Reply


      Ads make a difference, “EARLY ON!”

      A lot of people still watch television live, whether it be news programs, or shows that they’re catching while the DVR’s do the recording. The real problem, in addition to DVR’s, is that by September voters in swing states are already psychologically numbed to advertisements.

      Like I said earlier, super Pacs need to avoid spending money during primaries, and save their funds to put out positive advertising early on, to define their candidate. If you can define the opposing parties candidate early on, thats all well and good. Especially during elections against incumbents however, you need to play defense until the campaign can spend its own money after the convention. That means defining your candidate early on, and snuffing out any narratives that might bite the candidate in the butt later on.

    • MikeN
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 3:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I think your diagnosis is off. That means you think Romney was winning independents by 20 earlier, which is possible. I think it is more likely that the Obama campaign turned out some more votes in the last week of the campaign who otherwise would have stayed home.
      Going for amnesty will not boost Hispanic votes substantially. After the 86 amnesty, Hispanics voted more for Democrats.

      How about instead just sending money towards the candidates in Hispanic districts, instead of leaving them unopposed. Let them have a substantial funding so they can help build support. 2014 elections, spend 10 million on black and Hispanic districts, hoping to get a few percentage points boost in the presidential race.

      • Ron
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

        I agree. If we go for the Dream Act, the Dems will up the ante and ask for Amnesty. No matter what we do, they’ll get the credit. We voted for the Civil Rights Act, we marched for civil rights, but who do the Blacks vote for? It’s a brand problem: they’re for the little guy, we’re for the rich guy. Romney was just too rich. Yet I can get over that we did it to ourselves, our own people stayed home. What does this say about the party’s leadership that we didn’t pick up on this?

  9. ShockandAwe
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 1:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Still like to know how Obama always seemed to know how to get “just enough” votes in these states, despite having 10 million fewer overall votes and very long lines at every suburban polling place compared to the past 20 years.

    • Billy Butch
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 1:27 pm | Permalink | Reply

      “Long lines” gave them the necessary cover 🙂

      Posted November 8, 2012 at 1:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Believe me – there was widespread cheating on Tuesday. Was it enough to screw Romney? Time will tell and there are people far smarter than me who will sift through this data county by county but only a fool would believe cheating wasn’t part of this. How do we go from +10-+20% on enthusiasm right up until election day and then fall off a cliff? Call it sour grapes if you’d like but as a lifelong Chicagoan…..just sayin.

  10. Posted November 8, 2012 at 1:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I still dont buy that Sandy made up that many minds. I am with Britt Hume anyone who used that storm as a decided was already leaning so far to Obama they were about the fall off the fence.

    I do believe the Republicans need to learn from this that a 18 month primary fight with what 25-50 televised debates DID LESS THAN ZERO to help them in any way shape or form. All it did was show the moderates of the county what whack jobs the right wing like Bachman and Santorum are, how stupid Perry was, how out of touch and irrelevant Gingrich and Cain were and attracted the loon vote to Ron Paul. But most importantly it forced Romney to play the sprint to the hardcore right game and thus allowed Obama’s campaign to sit back and just collect idiotics, stupid right wing BS that he said and paint him with a paint sprayer of Right Wing nut. Then instead of sticking to almost anything he said in that 18 month primary…Romney played the game and ran back to the center where Obama painted him as coreless and visionless.

    The primary system worked when it was under the radard, for both parties. Everyone knew there was a primary and the hardcores were the only ones that cared. You got two candidates and away they went the summer of the election and it was what it was. Any painting of either guy with the brush from the primary didn’t stick because nobody knew or cared about it.

    Republicans have to resist the notion of starting Campaign 2016 publically yesterday. We have to take this back to a quiet process. REFUSE 97 debates. REFUSE all this being testified. Hell I would love it there was a way the GOP could settle on a ticket fast and just Bam in late 2015 announce Here is our PRE/VP ticket. And watch the democrats eat each other to replace Obama. I do not see a 75 year old Biden being viable in 2016. It is Hillary and Cuomo PERIOD.

    Side note: Romney could have chosen Jesus Christ as VP, the VP NEVER makes a difference. Look at McCain…she brought attention but they got creamed by 7 pts.

    • Billy Butch
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 1:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Hillary and Cuomo will eat each other trying to get the nomination leaving the door open for a “dark horse” candidate.

    • WillBest
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 1:52 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Sandy didn’t make up anybody’s mind. Those people were going to vote for Obama anyway. You could argue it gave them a reason to get off their butt and down to the polling booth, but I find that suspect as well.

    • WolvenOne
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 1:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I agree with the long primary. I could actually SEE it change the country as it went on. People went from being angry at the President, to being disgusted with both parties. It was too long, too visible, and too heavily dominated by third tier candidates.

      I disagree with the Sandy thing. At times of crisis people ALWAYS rally around the sitting President, at least initially. This is why war time presidents never lose, even if they aren’t particularly well liked. Additionally, the polls shifted at that exact same time. Specifically, Romney lost support among Independent voters on polls released on Friday and later, which means that on Thursday, the day after Halloween, the day when Chris Christie appeared with the President, Obama got a bump in support.

      The cause and effect in this case, is just FAR too clear. I know people want to throw a deeper more complicated explanation together, but in this case its obvious. He had a huge lead among independents before that point, and it was drastically cut down in size afterward. That made the difference.

      • PeterJ
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 2:18 pm | Permalink

        Yep. Long primary for us with all those debates merely provided fodder for Obama who ran uncontested. And since by the nature of long primary seasons candidates slowly drop out, different states effectively had different primaries. I guess for a contrary example you can look to 1992 where Clinton emerged from a large pack, but the economy had tanked somewhat and Bush1 had lost most of his earlier huge popularity.

      • Posted November 8, 2012 at 2:20 pm | Permalink

        People always rally around presidents in times of crisis?

        Tell that to George W. Bush during Katrina or George HW Bush (90% approval to defeat in the same year) or Jimmy Carter during the hostage crisis.

        Sandy did not flip this election. You also have to remember people like to come up with good, deep ideas on why they do what they do. Are you going to tell an exit pollster you voted for Obama simply cause he’s black? or you voted for Romney because he isnt Obama nad not a socialist? No…people LIE…A LOT…so oh he acted so presidential during Sandy sounds better than “Im a clueless dumbass that hasnt paid attention for 4 years”

        Sorry Sandy was NOT the reason this race went the way it did. We had Obama where we weanted….he was way down in EV, he lost 9 million votes from 2008…our polling showed our people were fired up…we had him on the ropes, dizzy and easily ready to be knocked out…only we didn’t even step in the ring. We JUST DIDN’T SHOW UP on Tuesday. PERIOD

    • Ron
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 5:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

      That’s another bright spot in this disaster–our bench is full of a new breed–Ryan, Rubio, Martinez, McDonnell–not to speak of Jeb Bush, not new but sufficiently removed from his brother’s tenure to be viable as a contender. I just hope we figure out a better way to go through the process and how to limit who throws a hat in the ring.

      Hillary will be 69–not young and tarnished by Benghazi.

    • mikemx75
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 6:17 pm | Permalink | Reply

      “Side note: Romney could have chosen Jesus Christ as VP, the VP NEVER makes a difference. Look at McCain…she brought attention but they got creamed by 7 pts.”

      Disagree. Palin was the only reason there was even a slight amount of enthusiasm into a boring, emotionless candidate and campaign dripping in ineptness. Until she came along he was about to go down like Mondale did in 84. As for 2012, an election which we essentially lost by less than 380,000 votes over 4 states…………you’re kidding yourself if you think Rubio doesn’t get that in Hispanic voters especially after that interview Obama did with the Spanish channel which was a perfect 2008 broken promise and a campaign point Rubio could have hammered for 2 months up until the other night.

  11. WillBest
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 1:50 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I am going to say this again.

    First, its not just those votes, you need a comfortable margin otherwise you spend 6 months in recount hell. So it is closer to 700,000 votes.

    Second, you are talking about seriously pushing swing states which represent the country pretty well off their represenative line. You may do that in 1 or 2 swing states but you aren’t going to be able to achieve that across the board which is what you are implying could happen.

  12. PeterJ
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 2:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Maybe someone has already commented or asked about this, but I wonder how many of those who did not show up on election actually did vote in a primary. And are the voter rolls of Ohio open where you could compare 2008 voting to 2012 primary and general election voting? If so, that would give a targeted list of registered but rarely vote, and voted primary this year but not general, to survey for their reasons.

  13. bittertea
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 6:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I guess I didn’t think our voters needed their hand held. I think the entire concept of having to drag a voter to the polls is repellent. The damage this president is doing and will continue to do if left unchecked is so self-evident that it will take generations to repair it, if ever. If people can’t be bothered to act in their own self interest, then I give up. I’d rather give a bigger check to St. Jude’s or the Shriners. Just heard that in the middle of the election O signed the death-warrant on private health insurance. A Pox on all their houses.

  14. bittertea
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 6:48 pm | Permalink | Reply

    For what its worth I caught some of Rush’s show today and have to agree. Hispanic voters don’t give a damn about amnesty, and listening to the political class inside the beltway (Krauthamer, is done at our peril. They just want the free debit card. Once they reach a certain level of income, they become very conservative, just like many successful Blacks. Caving on immigration will be a disaster and erode the base even more. As a Hispanic American, who’s grandfather immigrated from Zamora in Central Mexico , I can tell you that the way to reach them is through work ethic and future posterity, not treat bags.

    • Billy Butch
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 7:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

      This is where I disagree a bit. There’s nothing that allows us to a) get ahead of the conversation and support rationale, pragmatic immigration (inc. DREAM Act as a tactical) and then shepherd them into the party. There are a number of common points that can be leveraged.

      • Billy Butch
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 7:37 pm | Permalink

        Sorry, replace “allows” with “prevents”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: