Why has GOP turnout taken a dive?

[fskimospy]

I'm going to disagree somewhat here. It only takes a small percentage of GOP voters not turning out because they don't like Romneycare, or his overall moderate stance, or the fact that he's mormon, to sway a close election. These turnout numbers should be viewed cautiously in terms of predictive power to the general election, but it isn't a great sign for the GOP this year.

Comparisons with Kerry are iffy in the sense that there are conservatives who literally think Romney is a liberal in sheep's clothing and they fanatically believe this. This includes both libertarian types and social conservatives. Dems weren't that excited over Kerry, but in general they didn't hold these kinds of strong negative opinions of him.

Possible, but I will bet that 2012 turnout by self identified Republicans will be equal to or greater than historical averages.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'm going to disagree somewhat here. It only takes a small percentage of GOP voters not turning out because they don't like Romneycare, or his overall moderate stance, or the fact that he's mormon, to sway a close election. These turnout numbers should be viewed cautiously in terms of predictive power to the general election, but it isn't a great sign for the GOP this year.

Comparisons with Kerry are iffy in the sense that there are conservatives who literally think Romney is a liberal in sheep's clothing and they fanatically believe this. This includes both libertarian types and social conservatives. Dems weren't that excited over Kerry, but in general they didn't hold these kinds of strong negative opinions of him.

But can you imagine the right favoring Obamas SCOTUS pics? They're well aware of issues beyond the choice of candidates.

 

[monovillage]

Possible, but I will bet that 2012 turnout by self identified Republicans will be equal to or greater than historical averages.

If Obama's religious war an Americans continues then I bet you're right. Bad idea to give his opposition this type of issue 9 months before an election.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/sto.../reverse-rule-for-contraception-coverage.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012...-contraceptives-boehner-idUSTRE8171N220120208

http://www.lifesitenews.com/southern-baptist-leader-we-will-not-comply-with-hhs-mandate.html

 

[Jhhnn]

beating a sitting president is hard.

you never really see the best candidates making a push in an incumbency year. why waste the effort if they've got the luxury of waiting 4 years and making a play in a more favorable contest, where their opponent isn't going to get to ride around in Air Force One on the tax payer's dime and have "Hail to the Chief" to play every time he walks into a room?

that's why you end up with candidates like Kerry, Dole, and Mondale.

Is that why we ended up with Ronnie?

Just sayin'...

 

[fskimospy]

If Obama's religious war an Americans continues then I bet you're right. Bad idea to give his opposition this type of issue 9 months before an election.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/sto.../reverse-rule-for-contraception-coverage.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012...-contraceptives-boehner-idUSTRE8171N220120208

http://www.lifesitenews.com/southern-baptist-leader-we-will-not-comply-with-hhs-mandate.html

Unlikely that such a move will matter much. Not only do a majority of Americans approve of this requirement, a majority of Catholics do. While perhaps this will rile some of the most extreme religious right, it's probably not a super huge long term issue.

 

[woolfe9999]

Possible, but I will bet that 2012 turnout by self identified Republicans will be equal to or greater than historical averages.

I would take that same bet. The GOP base is very fired up against Obama. I predict a modestly higher than average turnout. But that doesn't mean it will be enough for Romney to win. The question will remain, how much better would the turnout have been had their been a candidate that the GOP supported more strongly? I view the Romney negatives as not guaranteeing a low overall turnout, but as an offset to the expected high turnout. And it doesn't need to be that huge an offset to hand the election to Obama. Worse yet for the GOP, if someone like Paul or Trump decides to run as an independent or third party, they may as well just hand the keys over to Obama now.

 

[fskimospy]

I would take that same bet. The GOP base is very fired up against Obama. I predict a modestly higher than average turnout. But that doesn't mean it will be enough for Romney to win. The question will remain, how much better would the turnout have been had their been a candidate that the GOP supported more strongly? I view the Romney negatives as not guaranteeing a low overall turnout, but as an offset to the expected high turnout.

Oh I believe Romney is quite likely to lose, barring further economic catastrophe. I'd also generally agree that he would probably inspire lesser overall turnout than other potential candidates. Despite all this, I'm quite confident that Republican turnout in this election will be larger than average, not just in total numbers but in percentage of registered Republicans.

The pathological hatred of Obama coming from over there is completely nuts, there's no way they will allow something like a shitty candidate stand in the way of voting against him.

 

[Jhhnn]

I really doubt this matters. The Republicans don't like their candidate, but they really hate Obama. Even if they aren't turning out to vote for Romney now, you can rest assured they will be there in November.

The Democrats couldn't have cared less about Kerry, but 2004 still saw record turnout.

Well, yeh, but Repubs were all revved up *for* GWB in 2004- Ownership Society! Support the Troops! Terrarist Threat & breaking their balls at Gitmo! Tax Cut Hero! Faux Down Home Texas Charm!

They're not revved up about anything positive, they lack somebody to get behind, and many of them realize that their Congresscritters have behaved very badly... They were all revved up for the teaparty in 2010, even as Dems were disappointed, so total turnout was very low... Mediscare won't work anymore, either...

When they actually think for themselves, and some do, they find little real reason to hate Obama, no matter what Rush tells 'em. Osama killer! Got us out of Iraq! Stayin' strong in Astan! Payroll Tax cutter! Healthcare Reformer! Wants to raise taxes on the Rich!

And if one in five repub voters are leaning to Obama, as the World Nut Daily poll offers, Romney or anybody else will get eaten alive...

Dems aren't staying home, at all, even with some lack of enthusiasm for Obama- we want the HOR back, and we won't get it staying home...

 

[Jhhnn]

Oh I believe Romney is quite likely to lose, barring further economic catastrophe. I'd also generally agree that he would probably inspire lesser overall turnout than other potential candidates. Despite all this, I'm quite confident that Republican turnout in this election will be larger than average, not just in total numbers but in percentage of registered Republicans.

The pathological hatred of Obama coming from over there is completely nuts, there's no way they will allow something like a shitty candidate stand in the way of voting against him.

I really don't htink the pathological hatred is really broad based, but rather highly vocal puffed up by rightwing media sources & commentators, & led from the top down, like the Tea Party...

 

[woolfe9999]

Oh I believe Romney is quite likely to lose, barring further economic catastrophe. I'd also generally agree that he would probably inspire lesser overall turnout than other potential candidates. Despite all this, I'm quite confident that Republican turnout in this election will be larger than average, not just in total numbers but in percentage of registered Republicans.

The pathological hatred of Obama coming from over there is completely nuts, there's no way they will allow something like a shitty candidate stand in the way of voting against him.

Yeah that's about right, but look to the Paulbot/libertarian bloc, which has grown somewhat in size since 2008 and now incorporates some younger voters, to sit home or vote libertarian. The social conservatives will probably grudgingly go along with Romney, particularly if he chooses a socially conservative running mate. But I wouldn't underestimate the lack of party loyalty of these libertarians, or their particular hatred of Romney. I honestly don't think they care if by sitting home they hand the election to Obama because they don't view Romney as being any better. Some seem to think he's even worse.

- wolf

 

[davmat787]

And the right thing for you to do is stop clinging to your dying ideology. The writing is on the wall. The policies of the GOP have weakened our nation and they can't hide from it anymore.

As for voter turnout, even hardcore Republicans hate the current crop of candidates. Everyone knows this.

Don't confuse the GOP with conservatism.

Perhaps it was inevitable. Conservatives are not as interested in federal government, perhaps that is partly why there is a total lack of quality candidates to represent them? Sort of a catch 22.

 

[monovillage]

Unlikely that such a move will matter much. Not only do a majority of Americans approve of this requirement, a majority of Catholics do. While perhaps this will rile some of the most extreme religious right, it's probably not a super huge long term issue.

I disagree, I think you'll see some poll numbers shifting if the issue goes on too long. I think it more likely that President Obama will have Sebelius change the ruling.

 

[Siddhartha]

never mind

 

[Fern]

This topic gets a fair amount of discussion.

It's unfortunate and disappointing that one of polling firms hasn't called Repub voters and asked those who didn't vote in their states' primary why not.

Fern

 

[Fern]

I disagree, I think you'll see some poll numbers shifting if the issue goes on too long. I think it more likely that President Obama will have Sebelius change the ruling.

I think you're right.

Too many prominent Dems are against Obama on this.

Fern

 

[zsdersw]

"The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it."

- PJ O'Rourke

 

[Mursilis]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/08/opinion/avlon-gop-turnout-down/index.html?hpt=hp_bn3



I think the GOP should stop making it easier for Obama to win. So far, though, they're not interested in that.

It's the charisma gap. The last GOP president who really seemed to inspire people to vote for him, as opposed to against the Dem, was Reagan. Since that time, the Dems have had Clinton and Obama, two candidates who really seemed to inspire people rather than just run on a "lesser evil" platform.

 

[Bitek]

It's more than just these candidates. A decline in rightwing media viewership preceded this about a year ago. The whole Republican brand is in trouble. Their core ideology for the past 30 years reached its logical conclusion under Bush and now they don't have anything left other than extremism and obstructionism. And it looks like that is quickly running its course as well.

Indeed.

Yea, the candidates are horrendous and the messages are terrible.

The only unifying message I see out of them is Doom and Gloom, and we should really think about war with Iran, and lets give Mitt more tax cuts.

Even Mitch Daniels response to the SOTU address was a bleak and comically negative speech. How do they expect to attract any voters with the message:
"Everything sucks and we're going down the shitter, and we had nothing to do with it. Let's cut some of your benies to give out more tax cuts for the top. Its worked so well in the past."

 

[Mursilis]

Yea, the candidates are horrendous and the messages are terrible.

The only unifying message I see out of them is Doom and Gloom, and we should really think about war with Iran, and lets give Mitt more tax cuts.

Even Mitch Daniels response to the SOTU address was a bleak and comically negative speech. How do they expect to attract any voters with the message:
"Everything sucks and we're going down the shitter, and we had nothing to do with it. Let's cut some of your benies to give out more tax cuts for the top. Its worked so well in the past."

I'm no fan of the particulars of the GOP message, but it's definitely time for some doom and gloom regardless. Even restoring the cuts Bush endorsed, the deficit is still going to be huge, and will be even larger as more of the health care reform comes online and the population continues to age. This country needs to make some tough choices, and politicians of both parties need to stop pretending otherwise. The GOP hasn't met a problem a tax cut can't solve, and the Dems still think no one has to actually pay for a vast expanse of entitlements, and the stupid sheeple just lap this stuff up from both parties rather than face reality. "Obama gonna pay my mortgage!"