• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Report: 2004 turnout numbers would have elected Romney

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney would have won the presidency if the white and black turnout rates had stayed at their 2004 levels, according to a new analysis of 2012 election.

“The battleground states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida and Colorado would have tipped in favor of Romney, handing him the presidency if the outcome of other states remained the same,” according to Associated Press’s summary of research by William Frey, an expert at the Brookings Institution.

Overall turnout declined from 62 percent in 2008 to 58 percent in 2012, Frey reported.

The drop-off reduced the overall turnout by up to 5 million votes, despite a slight increase in the number of eligible white voters, said the AP report.

In 2004, the national turnout was 60 percent, and black turnout was significantly below 2008 and 2012 levels.

The 2012 drop-off was concentrated among GOP-leaning white voters.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/29/r...bers-would-have-elected-romney/#ixzz2RrCGs0zW
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
If frogs had wings they could fly.

We can "if" forever and it will change nothing in the hear and now.
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
If frogs had wings they could fly.

We can "if" forever and it will change nothing in the hear and now.
Not necessarily - by seeing what went wrong in the past - you may be able to change results for the future.

But the big problem is that many Evangelicals saw 2008 as an election for Pastor-in-chief.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It has been argued on this board that Obama had a mandate. I argued that there 1. is no such thing as mandate as a President in the sense that everyone should give him everything he wants. 2. that Obama only won because of poor turnout by conservatives who did not have faith in Romney.

Now we see that had we had turnout by conservatives like we have had in the past Romney would have won.
 

Magnetic Poles

New Member
Now we see that had we had turnout by conservatives like we have had in the past Romney would have won.

Maybe not. They may not have voted for him. Perhaps they viewed him as not representing their interests. Perhaps their decision to sit out WAS their vote...not feeling good about either candidate.

The GOP has only itself to blame. It wasn't the Democratic Party that nominated that retread, liberal-wearing-a-conservative-mask. Romney is not, and never has been, a conservative. He pandered to the right to try to get elected, and they saw through his facade of fabrication and born-again conservatism.
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
Its time to have CLOSED primaries - then maybe Republicans will be able to choose a true Republican.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Bush's popularity is rising.

The 2004 election was a good win for Bush against Kerry but things changed in 2008 and 2012 when the Democrats registered a lot of new voters and the GOP nominated moderates two times in a row. As for 2012, Romney was shunned by many voters who did not want a full-blown Mormon cultist in the White House. I sometimes watch a Mormon show called "History of the Saints". It is notable for what it omits more than for what it says. It speaks of Mormon martyrdom, not Mormon illegal activity. I think that this gloss over the truth is what tires the public of Mormonism.
 

just-want-peace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The rapture has got to be just around the corner---------I actually agree with MP!
Not sure, but I believe this is the 2nd time this has happened.
In all honesty if a true conservative had been A choice, I really have no doubts that the results would have been very different. Unfortunately at this point, I'm afraid that so many more have been added to the government's teats that even a true conservative would now face overwhelming odds!
But, as many have said, and I believe, the "ZERO" is God's judgment on the USA.
 

preachinjesus

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Romney was a terribly weak candidate.

Politics, like life, is full of "shoulda-woulda-couldas." I stated it around here and with the small number of people who I discuss politics with, Romney was going to be the nominee and was going to smoked by President Obama. He was a terrible candidate.

One of the challenges is that the GOP not a better option for evangelicals or Christians right now. They truly have nothing to offer our segment other than a few lingering issues that they give us lip service over but will not do anything about. In the national spectrum it is a dangerously out of date, detached, homogenous group of elites who are running their party.

Romney's largest problem (which was reinforced by the 40% video) was that he was, from the get go, linked with the white, aristocratic, ruling class of the GOP and never was able to identify himself otherwise. He had a couple of moments where he could have changed the conversation (um, Libya anyone?) but because of is dilettantism was simply unable to articulate a clear position. The voters never got beyond the country club, private jet owning, hedge fund running image and they don't identify with this.

Honestly, Romney did a significant disservice to anyone who is part of the GOP. They had a historical moment where an incumbent faced huge unemployment, exploding deficits, failed promises, overwhelming antagonism, and then an international disaster of unparalleled proportions who got re-elected.

It was an unbelievable comedy of errors. I just don't know if a gargantuan turn out would have helped him at all.
 
Top