I was working out last night and watching the election results and I kept noticing the number of total voters between the Republicans and Democrats.
For instance, in Wisconsin:
Democrats
Obama 645,554
Clinton 452,590
Uninstructed 860
Total 1,099,004
Republicans
McCain 224,122
Huckabee 151,114
Paul 19,129
Romney 8,083
Uninstructed 852
Total 404,300
Twice as many voters in the Democratic Primary versus the Republican one. "But, Phil," you say, "the Republican nominee has basically been decided and all the Huckabee votes are protest conservative votes." Ok sure, that's a great point. So let's look at South Carolina when the Republican nomination was still in doubt.
Democrats
Obama 295,091
Clinton 141,128
Edwards 93,552
Kucinich 551
Total 530,322
Republicans
McCain 147,283
Huckabee 132,440
Thompson 69,467
Romney 67,132
Paul 16,054
Guiliani 9,494
Hunter 1,048
Total 443,065
So, only 90,000 difference in votes there, but that's still significant in a southern state and typically a Republican state. What that does seem to show me is that the Republicans are going to have to have a strong "get-out-the-vote" plan to match the fervor of the Democrats and McCain will have to play/pander to conservatives in order to keep them from staying home.
And on the Democrat side, whoever the nominee ends up being will have to work hard to keep their opponent's supporters going against them. It going to be a very interesting election.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
Republicans are gonna lose. Karl Rove has done an excellent job of destroying the Republican Party. No amount of get out the vote is gonna help the Republicans at this point. Too many people have bailed.
It seems to me the republicans are viewed only as moral conservatives these days. Fiscally, I can't say they've been all that responsible the past 8 years. They also seem to be for a "war" that has grown very unpopular among most folks.
The problem the Dems are about to have though may be split loyalties. Both candidates are doing their best to woo superdelegates, but if the nomination comes down to them, the appearance of a very 'un-democractic' selection method can only result in disenchantment among dem voters in both camps. When confronted with a system in which their vote has essentially been trumped by political allegiances, are these folk likely to get out again in november? well see.
Historically, Republican total voter count during primaries is lower than Democrat voter totals for 2 reasons:
1. Fewer Republicans vote in the primary than do in the general election.
2. Some Republicans actually vote on the Democratic side during the primary, specifically in Southern states.
I don't think, using imperical, historic data that you can draw the conclusion the the Republican voter total during the primaries and the general election will close to the same value. I think the exact opposite is revealed in such data.
Most Republicans I talk to are resigned to losing this election and waiting for 2012.
p.s. I am speaking only of historical data and any assumptions drawn from voter totals during the primaries.
I am makning no comment of any kind of whether the Republican candidate will win. I do believe that the Republican voter total will be much higher during the general election than we are seeing in the primaries. That doesn't mean the Republican candidate will win.
Crunching the numbers shows you one thing. Conservatives aren't getting out to vote because there is no conservative to vote for. Even when there were more in the race on the red side, there were no real clear conservatives.
A liberal will be the next President, even if the Republican candidate wins. The losers will be the American people who will have to get ready to hang on to what will be a rough 4-8 years of socialist programs that will lead to many more generations of government dependent citizens who can never realize what true freedom is. For those of you who really believe that socialism is the way to go, you are on the brink of getting your wishes come true.
It's going to be very interesting to see if you like what you wished for. There will be many amongst the Christian left who will have to answer to the devastating fruits of the socialist nation we are about to get, because this lies flatly in your hands. Many have blamed Dobson and others for the rise of the Conservative Christian right, well you can thank your good friends Jim Wallis, Mike Cope and others for what is about to occur in this nation "in the name of Jesus".
If I remember correctly Jesus wanted us to teach people to become dependent on him, NOT government.
Ada
Eli made this comment earlier: It seems to me the republicans are viewed only as moral conservatives these days
Living outside the US, I would have to agree. Of course my information is purely from the mass media, so I totally appreciate the bias this applies to the subject.
The only other common Republical "policy" appears to be pro-war.
Perhaps the Republical party has allowed the conservative religious-right to hikack all their other policy positions in favour of the two mentioned above, with the final outcome being that people dont see the party as a well balanced option for the needs of today's society.
As a conservative, I'm not comfortable with a pro war label. I hate war, it's never as eli said POPULAR and I wish war never came into the picture. But I am pro defend America and pro defend freedoms of all people of the world. If it requires war, I'm not happy with that but realize sometimes it's necessary. Sacrifices must be made sometimes for an outcome that protects the most people. God sacrificed his son for the hope of all man kind's freedom and even God used wars to fight for the right causes. It's not optimal, but sometimes necessary. It's not pretty, but neither was Jesus' death on the cross.
Ada
Ada,
Where in the constitution does it say that the US is supposed to defend the freedom of people around the world?
Also, doesn't Jesus's death on the cross show us that war ISN'T the best option? I mean, the Jewish people wanted Jesus to lead their army, and when they found out he could heal people and create food where there was none, that was pretty exciting. Yet, instead of resorting to violence to defend the freedom of God's people, he let God's people kill him. Maybe because through resurrection, we all are freed from the need to kill to protect our own lives?
1. I think the Republican party is on its way out, permanently. It's become too narrowly defined to appeal to a majority of Americans. This is a cycle in our politics that gets repeated about every 100 years. The last time was in the 1850's, ironically, when the Republican Party was first formed. Lincoln was elected President less than a decade later. Watch out for a new party to form and take over.
2. Justin - just to play devil's advocate: After WWI, the American populace came to the same conclusion you did: that we don't owe it to the world to be a policeman. So when Hitler came to power, and other countries declared war against Germany, America did not. It wasn't until Pearl Harbor that we got involved. That's not to say I think invading Iraq was necessary or a good idea, just that sometimes, there is a very compelling argument that we, as the strongest and wealthiest nation in the world, have an obligation to wield that power for peoples besides ourself.
It's just as constitutionally right to use the government to defend freedom as it is to use the government to feed the hungry and nurse illnesses. Neither are in the constitution, but both are used by our people to drive the political machine.
God's ways are always higher than our ways and far more difficult to understand. War and violence are difficult topics with complicated resolutions. It's never going to be easy. It's never going to be agreed on by all. Each must pray God's will and move from there. And even in doing that, we are all going to differ in what we determine to be God's will in our lives. There is nothing new under the sun.
My prayer every day that comes is Lord come quickly and end the mess we've made.
Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives, Liberals, Libertarians and Independents are all guilty of not doing God's will. No one party has it figured out. No one party has messed it up. No one candidate has it figured out. No one candidate can fix it. We all need God's help to move through life as an individual, as a nation and as a world.
Ada
Phil, forget politics, I'm more concerned about this "work out" you're doing. If you get any sexier, I'm taking my wife to a new church.
Daren
Tiffany,
The argument could also be made that if the United States hadn't gotten involved in WW1, and imposed harsh penalties on the germans, there wouldn't have been a world war 2.
And Ada, I don't think the government has any business policing the world, or trying to take care of everyone's needs. Its not right to steal from some to "benefit" others, and besides that, most of the time, there are negative things that arise from this government charity.
And I agree, the government is about as anti christian as you can get. I'd prefer it just to get out of people's lives so we can spread the good news that Christ has freed us from death, and we have nothing to fear.
Ada, meet Daren. Daren, Ada.
I would love to comment, but there's absolutely nothing more to be said.
Phil, I always like reading the debates on your comments. Such fun!
Um, one more thing...Ada, I really wish you knew Mike Cope. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone with a more Christ-like Spirit.
I'm sorry to have left the impression that I don't think Mike is seeking to be Christ like. That wasn't my intent at all. In fact I enjoy his ministry and have been a fan of his work for years. I just totally disagree with his politics and his belief that the government is the answer to the social problems of the world. I believe the answer lies in the body of Christ and that's us, not the government. Just a difference of opinion.
I agree with you Brandon. This is an interesting discussion and I especially appreciate that the discussion can go on without anyone getting nasty. Thanks for letting me participate.
Ada
Post a Comment