Where Did All the Voters Go?

When I am wrong, I’ll be the first to admit it. Well, I was wrong. Not that Romney wasn’t and isn’t a good man, but that I thought it was the one thing we needed; the thing the country craved. I believed more people would come to learn what I know of president Obama; that he’s not a good man.

I convinced myself that it was okay that Mitt wasn’t a true conservative, that being a good, honest man was enough. He is both those things. Probably a better man than I will ever be.

I bought in and am the worse for it.

Well, it wasn’t enough and I, for one, will try to never again make that mistake. I will try to never compromise again. I will resist allowing my gut instinct to be swayed.

I have preached to others for years that compromise is the easy path. Once you’ve compromised the first time, it just blurs the line you didn’t wish to cross. The line keeps advancing, leading you further away from your core and what you knew was right and just.

I am a conservative and I will only support conservative candidates and will only promote those with similar views.

As I discover and uncover more of why we lost this election, I am becoming convinced, going forward, to trust my original instincts and block out the noise. If I go down in flames, so be it.

Many republican wizards of smart have tried to explain that Romney and the republicans were just not sensitive enough to groups like Hispanics, women and homosexuals.

The problem we have is not a changing demographic, it is and has always been the countryclub, moderate wing of the republican party; insiders that choose our candidates for us. Those who believe the more moderate “electable” candidate is the only way to win were wrong and will continue to be wrong.

Our job as conservatives is to educate and try to rest control of the GOP from the moderates. Let’s please get away from the “Next man up” syndrome.

What Major Demographic Shift?

By: Tara Servatius

Conservatives need to take a collective breath and look closer at the numbers before they buy into the idea that GOP nominee Mitt Romney’s defeat was due to some kind of national demographic shift that now makes Democrat presidential candidates’ armor impenetrable.  Before you give in to the hysteria, here are a few things to keep in mind.

First, Barack Obama’s re-election showing was actually pretty unimpressive for a guy whose philosophies voters have supposedly adopted.  As of this writing on Wednesday, Obama’s vote total stood at an unimpressive 60,119,958.  That’s about what John Kerry got in 2004 (59,028,444).  President George W. Bush actually did far better than Obama in his 2004 reelection quest, posting a vote total that was about 2 million higher (62,040,610) than what Obama got on Tuesday.  That’s hardly a remarkable finish in a country with a population that has increased.  In fact, it’s a decline of 9 million votes from Obama’s 2008 total.

Had Romney (57,425,441) done as well as McCain did in 2008 (59,934,814), he and Obama would have run neck and neck, virtually matching each other’s vote totals.  That’s hardly the stuff of demographic ruin.

The question Republicans and conservatives need to ask is not why voters showed up for Obama, whose turnout wasn’t exactly extraordinary, but why millions of their own voters, people who had pulled the lever for Bush and McCain, didn’t do the same for Romney or simply stayed home.

Why did Romney get a full 2 million fewer votes than McCain did?  Why did those voters pull the lever for McCain, but not for Romney?  Who were they, and where did they go?  That is what Republican and conservative strategists need to find out.

Is it possible that Republicans and conservative-leaning independents just weren’t that wild about the guy?

Romney, you’ll remember, was not exactly popular with the GOP base through two primaries — the first of which he lost outright, and the second of which he won because, quite frankly, all the other candidates were largely unpresentable on the national stage.  Remember, Romney won just 52 percent of the votes cast in the primary — hardly a resounding send-off from his own party. Worse yet, Romney carried just 3 out of 43 states with 70-plus percent of the vote, compared to an average of more than 15 states by previous presumptive GOP nominees.

Evangelicals have always been suspicious of Romney’s Mormonism.  In fact, just days before the election, Paul Ryan had a phone teleconference with Evangelical leaders to rally them.  And the exasperation with Romney’s flip-flopping habit originated on the right, not on the left, and was well-known.  What’s more, the GOP’s anti-abortion wing has never been entirely comfortable with him the way they were with George W. Bush.  And some of the party’s base has wandered into the Tea Party and Ron Paul camps, where Romney was never fully welcomed, if embraced at all.

To understand Romney’s loss, we need to look not just at what Obama’s voters are doing, but what ours are up to as well.