204K Swing in Votes and Romney Would Have Been President
Since the defeat of Romney last Tuesday there have been a plethora of gloom and doom stories written about the GOP by gleeful Leftists and conservatives who should know better. Jim Gerahty at National Review Online gives us some needed perspective:
Obama’s margin in some other key states:
At this hour, 120,556, 279 votes for Obama and Romney have been counted nationwide.
The sad and sorry truth is that we who oppose Obama got overconfident and our adversaries out-organized and out-hustled us. In short we lost this election because we failed Politics 101 in not getting our vote out. Time to stop moaning and start thinking, and then working for next time. The rant at the beginning of this video was given by a Leftist after the election results of 2010. The political wheel always comes round.
26 Responses to 204K Swing in Votes and Romney Would Have Been President
![](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_YqM_zH1K7Uw/TOK1hLlt3BI/AAAAAAAAA1o/HCzoksN1-ME/s1600/email+icon+32x32.png")
- georgeinbandon,oregon commented on Lent in a Sinless Age
(27 minutes ago) - anzlyne commented on Invincible Ignorance
(1 hours ago) - Marietta commented on Why it is Worth Worrying: On the Brink of a New Pontificate
(1 hours ago) - georgeinbandon,oregon commented on Lent in a Sinless Age
(2 hours ago) - Tim Fitz commented on Invincible Ignorance
(2 hours ago) - Mary M. commented on We Must Not Forget
(3 hours ago) - Pinky commented on Lent in a Sinless Age
(4 hours ago) - George Haberberger commented on The New York Times as State Organ
(4 hours ago) - Larry Peterson commented on Why it is Worth Worrying: On the Brink of a New Pontificate
(4 hours ago) - Thomas Collins commented on The New York Times as State Organ
(5 hours ago) - philip commented on What Wondrous Love Is This?
(5 hours ago) - philip commented on What Wondrous Love Is This?
(5 hours ago) - philip commented on What Wondrous Love Is This?
(5 hours ago) - Elizabeth commented on Lent in a Sinless Age
(5 hours ago) - Jeanne Rohl commented on At Last Night's Emergency SCHISM Meeting...
(5 hours ago)
I have to wonder how many of the votes that Obama did get had been gotten via election fraud.
My rule of thumb Paul is that in any state with large cities the margin of fraud for Democrats is around three to five percent of their vote total. There is a reason why Democrats fight tooth and nail voter ID laws. In Illinois Chicago is traditionally very slow to report, presumably so the Democrats can manufacture the votes they need if the election is a squeaker.
Fox news reported that more Mormons voted for John McCain than Mitt Romney -is anyone buying that? What’s done is done – it’s just a tragedy for this country. I’m afraid that Obama’s tyranny will begin the collapse of our country. There are already rumbles in Texas about leaving the union. And if Texas moves, watch the southern states. Also Alaska. Nor do I think these are fringe movements. To escape the Federal leviathan, States will begin to take matters into their own hands when they feel they’ve been given no alternative.
I have seen no comments on the massive abstention rate – Compare this with the French press, full of dire predictions that the “missing 20%” in their Presidential election threatened the republican compact and the principles of ’89!
American turnout at elections MPS has never been that high. The American attitude has always been that people are free to vote, or not vote as they please. In certain Democrat enclaves, usually in urban centers, there does seem to be an ongoing concern for the dead exercising the franchise!
“American turnout at elections MPS has never been that high.”
True, but with what was at stake here, with both sides predicting doom if the other won, to have millions of fewer voters than in 2008 is unbelievable.
I hate to burst this bubble. Abraham Lincoln ran the Civil War against the South with the mandate of 40% of the popular vote. Douglas, Breckenridge and Bell earned 60% of the 1860 American people’s votes.
Obama’s electoral mandate is far superior to Lincoln’s. It empowers him to impose his legacy: the destructions (hyper-regulation and and confiscatory taxation) of both the evil, unjust private, market economy (private property is theft) and the United States of America.
The red states need to secede. Obama needs to steal their wealth to bail out his base: bankrupt blue states: CA, IL, MI, NJ. NY, et al.
If you have transferable personal property you need to cash out and emigrate to America, i.e., a red state.
Under normal circumstances, I would say we lost by just 204k votes. But given we had a president where every statistic worked against him in addition to his assaults on life, marriage, the Church, etc., the margin should have been much wider.
Again, focusing on the whats and whys of the presidential race misses why the GOP lost. The losses go beyond Romney vs Obama. Conservatives lost at all levels. Blaming the presidential race loss on voter turnout, computer programs, etc does not explain why people voted for gay marriage, legitimizing marijuana, against government funding of abortion, etc. in addition to the senate losses.
Some are trying to take comfort in the NYT interactive map that shows America pulling right because most counties voted more Republican than in 2008. I take no comfort in that map because it’s obvious those areas are tilting more right than 2008 because so many voted for Obama in 2008. The vote totals were already heavily weighted blue that by the time 2012 election came around, the most probable movement would be right. The numbers are misrepresenting reality.
My attitude right now about Election 2012 is more in line with this guy…
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1112/ahlert.php3
Also of interest if watching the George Wiegel interview on The World Over. They talk about the election and especially the Catholic vote. There is a part they talk about the impact of the bishops’ letters read from pulpits and the claim we need more and better catechesis. Neither are very effective if the intended audience is either not there to listen or refuse to listen. Why? See my previous link at Jewish World Review.
CORRECTION: But given we had a president where every statistic worked against him in addition to his assaults on life, marriage, the Church, etc., the winning margin should have been much wider.
“Conservatives lost at all levels.”
Not in the House races. A wave election like 1994, 2006, 2008 and 2010 would have seen the House flip. This was a base turnout election and the Obama election team did a great job getting their voters to the poll, and the Romney campaign did a very poor job. Lets see how 2014 and 2016 goes before we begin to draw large conclusions from 2012.
“I hate to burst this bubble. Abraham Lincoln ran the Civil War against the South with the mandate of 40% of the popular vote. Douglas, Breckenridge and Bell earned 60% of the 1860 American people’s votes.”
Lincoln had a solid majority in the North. The Republican party was excluded from the ballot in virtually all the Southern states.
Secession worked so well in 1861-65. No thanks.
Democrat gains sounds like a loss to me.
Hmm, it didn’t publish the source. Here it is.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/12/seven-house-races-still-unresolved/
Woulda shoulda coulda. If Romney ran as a real conservative, he would have been president. But he didn’t so he isn’t.
What of counting by controlled electronic means?
“Not in the House races.”
There is no question that conservatism is alive and well at the congressional district level. Even Akin and Mourdock can operate safely at that level. Where it is having more problems is in the Senate and Presidential races. (NB I’m not stating that all Repubs ran as conservatives just that the voters perceive them that way and given their far left opponents it was true in a relative sense.)
To repeat, the Senate Repub hopefuls ran well behind Romney in many states. Many people who voted for Romney proceeded to vote for a far left Senator. The disconnect is astounding. Voters in ND voted for a Dem who will support the EPA harassment of oil drilling lifting the state. Romney voters in FL voted for a Senator who is fine with the death panels and would have blocked the repeal of Obamacare. Romney voters in WV voted for a Senator who will support the EPA shutdown of the coal industry. Even the feeble Romney campaign did make an issue about oil, coal and energy independence.
Will social conservatives turn out to vote when the Repubs rightly or wrongly use Akin and Mourdock as reasons why social conservatives must not be nominees? They didn’t even turn out in 2012 it seems.
“Democrat gains sounds like a loss to me.”
Not really when you consider that the Republicans gained 63 seats in 2010 and thus had a huge number of new seats to defend. Additionally almost all the Dem overall gains are attributable to redistricting in Illinois and California.
The vote margins hardly make for any mandate for the Obama agenda.
“Lincoln had a solid majority in the North. The Republican party was excluded from the ballot in virtually all the Southern states.”
Had Lincoln been on a ballot anywhere in the South, he would have received exactly as many votes as would have Lester Maddox in Harlem, NY in 1960.
The five and six-figure (that’s tens-of and hundreds-of-thousands for liberals and media geniuses) margins of victory in the swing states are well within the fraud range.
Not in NH. Way more than 40,659 liberals escared from Taxachussets and live tax-free in NH, and apparently vote democrat.
Likely, the Alinskyites stole the election for Obama and revenge.
Ron Paul stated it correctly when, the day before the election, he declared that “regardless of the outcome, the status quo will win”. I was proud that Dr. Paul did not bow to pressure and endorse the war-mongering collectivist Romney over the war-mongering collectivist Obama.
It is interesting to note that, to use an example, Dr. Paul received over 117K votes in the Florida Republican primary. Obama’s margin of victory in FL was, according to this story, just under 74K. Nearly all Ron Paul voters I know, besides being angry and disillusioned at their treatment by the Republican Party/Romney campaign, would decline to vote for a tried and true statist like Romney.
Given the numbers, in addition to FL, the “Ron Paul factor” very well may have cost Romney VA, OH, and NH. Do the math and you will see that had Romney won these four states, he would have won the electoral college. Extrapolate this to other close states, add in disillusioned Democrats who would have voted for Ron Paul, and you might have your answer to the question of “Why”.
“Had Lincoln been on a ballot anywhere in the South, he would have received exactly as many votes as would have Lester Maddox in Harlem, NY in 1960.”
We will never know T.Shaw since the powers that be in the South did not trust their own people enough to allow Lincoln’s name to appear on the ballot. Perhaps that also explains why in most Southern states it was a criminal offense to publish abolitionist material. It wasn’t only slaves that had their freedom severely circumscribed in the South prior to the Civil War.
“the “Ron Paul factor” very well may have cost Romney VA, OH, and NH.”
I would be more than happy to extend to Ron Paul (R. Pluto) a fair amount of the blame for the harm that Obama does in the next four years, but I can’t because he simply was not a significant factor in the outcome of the election, just as he was not a significant factor in the outcome of the primaries, Paulite delusions to the contrary notwithstanding.
As Stalin once stated, “its not the votes that count, but who is counting the votes”. There are numerous questions in my mind and red flags should be raised when Romney got zero votes in 59 precints in Philadelphia and even more where Romney got one vote? And these irregularities only seemed to have occured in the battleground states. Many voting machines over and over again kept going for Obama when the voter hit Romney. And how is it that in many precincts there were more votes cast than registered voters? Something is fishy in Dodge if you ask me. Did Romney really lose???
It’s a strange thing to read through these comments. Lots of blame to go around. Some blame Ron aul (who wasn’t even the ballot.
But a LOT of people blame voter fraud – despite the fact that the outcome was almost exactly what the polls predicted. I suppose the polls were all biased and skewed, too.
The fact remains that a majority of Catholic voters went for Obama. To me, this means it’s more complicated than fraud or blame or making the Catholic Church a wing of the Republican Party.
“But a LOT of people blame voter fraud”
Oh that there was an immense amount of fraud I have no doubt. For example the 59 Philadelphia inner precincts that reported not one vote for Romney, or the 11 Philadelphia precincts where court appointed Republican poll watchers were physically tossed out and the same precincts reported 99% for Obama.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/odd-romney-got-zero-votes-in-59-precincts-in-philly-9-in-ohio/
Without more proof I would not argue that fraud is the reason why Obama was reelected, but the fraud this time around was blatant and widespread.
“despite the fact that the outcome was almost exactly what the polls predicted.”
Actually the polls were all over the lot, with a wide divergence among the national polls.
“The fact remains that a majority of Catholic voters went for Obama.”
I think the breakdown was 50-48 with most “White” Catholics voting for Romney and most “Hispanic” Catholics voting for Obama. One would have hoped that all Catholics would have voted to toss out the most anti-Catholic administration in the nation’s history, but hope was in short supply last election day as I suspect it will be throughout this nation for the next four years.
These people will confiscate or destroy all you have.
Plan and prepare.
Do whatever you can to protect your family in the coming financial and societal cataclysm.
The Mayan December 2012 end time prophesy is explained: The stars foretold the idiots would re-elect Obama.