November 07, 2008
Gosh, why did the Republicans stay home?
2008 turnout same or slightly higher than 2004 but with a drop in registered Republicans voting.
Who woulda thunk it? Let's see-Republicans are presented with a candidate who voted against the Bush tax cuts, is for amnesty for illegal immigrants, was the co-author of the anti-free speech McCain/Feingold bill, talks about Wall Street "greed", and is a best friend to Democrats. And then they stayed home. Hmm. It's almost like there's a correlation there somewhere.
Posted by Karol at November 7, 2008 04:10 PM | TrackBackTechnorati Tags: Turnout+2008
Karol, I know that you're in NYC, but do you have any idea about who might oppose Barbara Boxer when she runs for re-election in 2010? I think I'm hoping for Meg Whitman.
Posted by: KS at November 7, 2008 05:35 PMIsn't there a general trend towards registering as an independent? This may just be an artifact of former Republicans registering as independents.
But you're right. McCain's "base" was the press, before it wasn't.
Posted by: Eric at November 7, 2008 06:15 PMOh, is Meg Whitman getting laid off also?
Posted by: Charles at November 7, 2008 11:01 PMMaybe if you and Ann Coulter had written more about how conservative and right of center Barack Obama was running, they would have come out in greater numbers to vote.
Posted by: nds at November 8, 2008 12:28 AM2008 = 1996:
An older war veteran Republican with not much of a unified message facing a younger, much more charismatic Democrat.
Posted by: Nobody Knows I'm A Sock Puppet at November 8, 2008 05:08 PMKarol, you're absolutely correct.
Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorini are both perfect examples of what's wrong with American business, and what is wrong with McCain. They both took vital businesses, applied biz school solutions, and almost ruined both of them all the while walking with a ton of dough. For some reason, McCain doesn't have much insight into the people with whom he associates.
Posted by: Casca at November 8, 2008 10:35 PMI have been trying to explain to a friend of mine who keeps saying "McCain lost because he ran to the base..." that, on the contrary, he did as well as he did because at the end of the day most of the Republican base didn't stay home. If McCain had run more of a centrist campaign, given his record...yeah, that wouldn't of ended well.
Posted by: James at November 9, 2008 09:15 PMSo who would have done better for the GOP in 2008? The adulterous pro-abortion New York mayor? The flip flopping Mormon? On paper, Fred Thompson could have but on paper...but as his campaign showed, he was not as good in reality. Maybe Huck could have done better I suppose but I don't know if the other candidates could have.
Posted by: Von Bek at November 10, 2008 08:56 AMShort answer: it's easy to get lost when you're in a big tent.
I too am wondering if many republicans did stay home...I like the sarcasm :) Thanks so much for your post!
Posted by: Minneapolis Homes for Sale at November 10, 2008 03:50 PMI think Huck would have done slightly better, yes. (Trust me, it pained me to say that.) Three months ago, I wouldn't have thought so. Once economy went the way of the U.S.S. Maine, however, _not_ being a Congress Critter would have been a positive.
I find it strange that both tickets were the best that this country could do.
Posted by: James at November 10, 2008 04:10 PM
