We didn't show up. That's right, this one was on us. And the sad part is, we had a path to victory, and just didn't take it.
Democrats even lent us a hand. In the 16 counties won by President Obama, turnout was down a whopping 210,000 from the overall turnout in those counties in 2008. That alone should have been enough to erase any Obama lead.
But we didn't take advantage of it, as turnout was down almost 125,000 from 2008 in counties won by Romney. Democrats spotted us 85,000 votes... and we did diddly-squat with it. And while Democrats will tout that their turnout advantage--another historical high on top of their 2008 high-water mark--it wouldn't have held if we'd had just shown up to the polls.
We measured Romney's performance against turnout from 2008, and had the GOP gone to the polls, Romney would have taken his 2012 deficit of 107,000 and turned it into a lead of over 60,000 votes. We didn't need to do anything special--no massive turnout reminiscent of 2004, and no need to match Democrat turnout like in 2010.
All we had to do was show up.
Our final poll analysis showed Romney was poised for victory:
What's even more troublesome for the President is that only if Democrats turnout at their 2008 levels does he lead Romney. Even a one-point shift to Republicans gives the edge to the Romney, taking the race from 48.3% Obama, 46.7% Romney to 47.6% Romney, 47.5% Obama.We said for months the polls were skewed. Yesterday proved that they were, but only those forecasting +40% Democrat turnout. Other than that, they were spot on. Independents broke toward Romney by 10%. We didn't need to match Democrat enthusiasm--we just had to get out and vote at our less-than-excited 2008 levels.
We failed, and Obama carried Ohio. Granted, Romney needed more than Ohio's 18 electoral votes for it to matter overall, but a victory nationwide needed to start with a victory here at home.
Ultimately we need to own this one, learn from it, and move on with the knowledge that we cannot rest on our laurels and expect to come out on the winning end. Arrogant or not, Democrats are already looking toward 2014, where our statewide officials will be on the ballot. Given Governor Kasich's immense popularity in the state, particularly among Democrats, he could survive a repeat of last night, but others might not be so fortunate.
Let's not give Democrats the opportunity. This one was on us. Next time, we'll be ready.
You keep saying that. But Kasich's approval rating is only 59% in one poll. Others have it lower and even <50%. Regardless, Ted Strickland's approval rating was 59% a year before the 2010 elections. It didn't hold.
ReplyDeleteBTW, the top counties for turnout were Republican counties... heavily Republican counties. You're turnout theory doesn't hold water. Just like you're "the polls were wrong" theory didn't hold water, or the "Romney crowds shows we're winning" theory didn't hold water, or the "Obama turnout is so underperforming Romney will win" theory didn't hold water.
Just. Stop. You're embarassing yourself.
Read. The. Facts.
DeleteI'm not making up my own numbers to fit in with some fairy tale reason as to why we lost this thing. The stats don't lie.
Even though turnout was highest in Republican counties, it wasn't as high as it was in 2008. That's my point. If we turn out those counties at 2008 levels, Ohio flips. It's that simple.
And the polls sample +40% Democrat were wrong--D's turned out at 38%. I'll own the fact that I was wrong on GOP enthusiasm--thus the purpose of this entire post.
If John Kasich is so popular, then why didn't his endorsement ad for Josh Mandel help him? Why didn't his support get Romney over the top? Why is it that the Ohio House Republicans could lose a seat under their new map in the Kasich midterms, when the Democrats were able to win the majority under the GOP's map in Strickland's midterm?
ReplyDeleteYeah, John Kasich is widely popular alright...
The problem is how to ever win Ohio again now that the Obama/Chicago voting machine has been implemented. Don't forget, he did not go to Chicago after college to help people, he went there to learn how to run the Chicago voting machine, and he mastered it.
ReplyDeleteNow in Ohio they Have a month to bus people to the polls and after voting supply them with Obama phone and other goodies. Ohio has 6 large cities that now has the Obama machine there, vote fraud and buying votes with freebies. I have no idea how we ever overcome this. Early voting has to be limted to a week at most to combat vote fraud potential, and photo id laws (that 85% of Latino and African American's support, it's not racist unless asking for an ID when someone buys beer is racist, it simply protects the vote.) Ohio will be blue for a long time, we have to concentrate on Congress and off Presidential year elections to combat the Progressive machine. Use House of reps to slow things down.
Ramboman- You said you were leaving if the Democrats won.
DeleteNeed help packing?
Excuses, excuses. Could it possibly be that the American people wanted President Obama to continue in office and preferred his policies and goals to that of Romney and the GOP? Is that even remotely possible, rather than some aberration? I hear the right wing punditry and mouthpieces asking "What happened? What can we do to reconstitute the party?" Could it be that the Republican party's primary goal of making President Obama a one term president and creating gridlock, rather than working in a bi-partisan fashion for the good of the country, backfired? Could it be that the American people saw that the ungodly mess left by eight years of Bush policies could not be corrected in four years (as was predicted by Obama)and wanted to continue in the direction the Obama administration was taking the country? Could it be that those who earnestly support the GOP need to take a realistic, hard look at it and realize that it has become the party of the wealthy and big business, religious zealots and the Tea Party loons. That perhaps if they stopped letting Rush Limbaugh and Fox News be the defacto leaders of their party some benefit may come of it?
ReplyDeleteOh I know, "Anonymous"! (what an original name too)
DeleteThe GOP is the party of the wealthy sure -- yet this morning CNBC reports that 8 of the 10 highest income counties in the USA voted heavily for Obama.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49726054
Oh yes, Obama is the savior of the poor. But for some reason over the last four years median income of the middle class dropped $2K, millions more food stamps, millions more below the poverty line, $3K more for health insurance/yr, $2K more for gas/yr; black youth unemployment at 50%, half college grads have no job...and on and on.
Yup you are correct we really need to fear Rush Limbaugh and the tea party. Rush and the Tea Party have crafted and passed dozens of laws that are really "hurting the poor" Ohhh well maybe not.
Maybe at some point single women and other "voting blocks" still capable of thought and reason might find that having contraceptives and not having a job is not a good trade-off?
Particularly so when the election of Romney would have had no impact on contraceptive availability in the first place?
Dahh ya think? Or do you even think?
Yes Fargo. I do think. That's why I vote the way I do. I used to be an independant. After Reagan and the transformation of your party, I went Democratic. I don't see myself changing any time soon. Probably because your party won't be changing any time soon.
DeleteGiven Reagan won in a 49 state landslide you must have felt lonely. You really thought Carter, Dukakis, Mondale and Kerry were Presidential timber? Well I guess I should allow that you DO since you now see Obama as such.
DeleteOne of these days I might meet an Obama supporter who can actually defend his record instead of just showing me his O-cult membership card.
I give credit to David Axelrod for making a silk purse from a sow's ear -- I underestimated him. But Obama it is not really possible to UNDERestimate that man.
You missed the point. It wasn't about how many states Reagan won. Your party won't be changing any time soon.
DeleteThe point on turn out is SO spot on! Sadly so.
ReplyDeleteI worked for the campaign for 3 months in Hamilton Co. The last two months I knocked on doors for 5 - 6 hours every day. I pounded on thousands of doors, literally.
The GOTV effort was huge in this county at least compared to past elections I have worked on. And almost to a person, the hundreds of voters that I talked to -- at their own doorstep -- were excited about the election the fall and really wanted to vote.
Yet after all this effort we had 188,600+ votes for Romney from Hamilton county -- that is 3.3% LESS than McCain in 2008. What?
Not many of us would dispute the claim that McCain was a much weaker candidate running in a much less favorable climate for republicans in 2008.
Yes there may be other factors for the loss -- but for dead certain part of our voter coalition did not show at the polls.
WHO WERE THEY AND WHY?
The message from this election to Ohio Republicans was clear and the choice is clear. You're going to either nominate people who can win general elections or you're going to lose. Which one is it going to be?
ReplyDeleteBrilliant! Nominate someone who can win. That is a an entirely new approach to elective politics. I take back my earlier remarks you DO indeed think.
DeleteThat anonymous wasn't me, Fargo. You sound a mite bitter.
DeleteOh well, I don't apologize for not knowing which Anonymous is which -- its a risk anyone takes by not bothering to properly ID themselves.
DeleteBitter? Maybe so what? Everyone is spouting out demographics is the reason Obama carried Ohio. Not really. A block of circa 300,000 GOP voters did not show up. I think I know who they are but I need to research it out first. I finally have the 2012 data in my GIS. I'll have a good idea soon enough.
Obama got 240,000 fewer votes in 2012 -- we did what was required to win and then didn't.
That's life but I have no regrets about being bitter for a while.
I hate to say it, the margin of victory was small here. The auto bailout favored the President. And the President didn't need Ohio. That's the take away for Ohio Republicans.
DeleteAs to the message for Republicans, yes, for example, Rubio is headed to Iowa, already.
As to voters' preference for the President's policies, gosh, the Obama agenda hasn't even been truly implemented. The federal regulations to implement his laws were carefully put off until after this election. I hope people like them; they're about to start rolling off the presses. Unfortunately, the economy is sagging again, and another recession would permanently cripple the country. Mitt's probably thinking hey I'm not so bad off on a private jet....
My sincere gratitude to the GOP campaign workers and the GOTV effort in Ashland, Auglaize, Belmont, Carroll, Champaign, Darke Delaware, Geauga, Harrison, Holmes, Knox, Medina, Mercer, Miami, Monroe, Noble, Putnam, Shelby, Stark, Tuscarawas, Union, Warren, Wayne counties!!
ReplyDeleteYou all did a great job! Your counties all turned out more votes for Romney in 2012 than produced for McCain in 2008.
If the rest of us had done as well as you folks Mitt Romney would have taken Ohio.
Sorry! I left the folks from Van Wert county off the list of achievers. The SOS site had incomplete data -- but Van Wert county also increased their GOP turn out on Tuesday compared to 2008.
ReplyDeleteAnd Darke?
DeleteYes Darke County was on my original list.
Delete"WHO WERE THEY AND WHY?" "I think I know who they are.." "I'll know soon enough"
ReplyDeleteWhat are you planning on doing, looking them all up and berating them?
I"m sorry. Apparently you don't realize how nuts that sounds.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteGee brilliant Anonymous!
DeleteI assume most would be able to figure out what I meant. I want to get an idea what block of republicans did not come to the polls and why. The reason should be obvious -- we need to know who did not vote so that we can fix the problem with a better GOTV in the next election.
Obvious to most but not you? Please try harder next time.
FYI I am using geographic/demographic analysis of the voter patterns to provide this answer.
I did not imply using any threats or violence did I? Odd you should jump to the conclusion.
The only people who use violence anymore are progressives, liberals, democrats and other assorted neo-facsists. Are you one of those?