The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionBig Story in Nevada
by Michael Sean Winters on Feb. 06, 2012
It wasn't much news that Mitt Romney won the Nevada caucuses on Saturday - we won them in 2008 also, in fact, he got a higher percentage of the vote in 2008 than he did this year. Nor was it big news that Ron Paul and Newt gingrich attained a virtual tie for second, leaving Rick Santorum in the dust.
No, the big news from Nevada was the turnout. It was down by about a quarter from four years ago. In Florida, many counties also reported a lower turnout than four years ago. This tells us two things. One, voters are just not thrilled about the current crop of candidates and their lack of enthusiasm means the eventual nominee will have to continue energizing the base when he should be focusing only on Independent voters. The second thing it means is that the highly touted Romney organization may be getting enough of its people to the polls to win plurality victories, but seeing as Gingrich has virtually no organization to speak of, Romney should not only be trouncing him but also getting more voters to the polls. If the Romney organization got all its voters to the polls In Nevada, and Gingrich, who had no organization consequently did not get his voters to the polls, what does that tell you about the quarter of the electorate that stayed home.
Maybe the hatred of Republicans for President Obama will be enough to get their people to the polls in November, but that is not the kind of "maybe" a campaign wants to cope with as it plans a general election strategy: The things you need to do to energize your base are also the kinds of things that tend to alienate swing voters. I hope Team Romney likes pickles, because his path to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue presents a lot of them.
One wonders whether GOP
One wonders whether GOP turnout declines have anything to do with mortality among the 2008 voters. If the missing voters are dead or disabled and have not been replaced by younger voters - or if they are Latino voters who have left the party, it is truly bad news for the GOP.
ROMNEY IS IN TROUBLE .... If
ROMNEY IS IN TROUBLE .... If you adjust for the Mormon voters who voted over 90% for Romney in Nevada, then he and Gingrich virtually tied. It may yet come down to a thrice married Catholic who wants to populate the moon and a Catholic who was trounced in his PA senatorial reelection race and appears to want to criminalize birth control. Has God answered Obama's prayers by loading the Republican candidates with losers? Meanwhile, the US bishops desparately try to replace Obama a "jailer-in-chief" of child abusers via a fabricated "religious liberty/ birth control" ploy .
The GOP is fast becoming a
The GOP is fast becoming a party of mostly middle aged to elderly white people. They don't have African-Americans, they don't have Hispanics, except for some elderly Cubans in Florida, and increasingly they don't have young White people due to their anti-gay hysteria and anti intellectualism [creationism anyone?].
I am a middle aged white guy who left the party due to the glorification of stupidity via W Bush, Sarah Palin, etc. It would be nice if the GOP could once again become a political party that appeals to people with IQ's above their body temperature.
Austin, Before making a
Austin,
Before making a snide remark about IQs, you must attend to your grammar. You use the possessive form (IQ's) when the plural is required. To quote from the Meredith Grammar Review --
"The correct use of plural and possessive forms may seem like a minor issue. Among educated persons, however, incorrect forms, especially misuses of apostrophes, stand out like red flags. One area executive has said he will not hire an applicant whose letter or resume includes such an error."
Now, this is a Catholic publication and one would hope that referring to low IQs would not have a place here.
Isn't "hate" an intolerant
Isn't "hate" an intolerant word for liberals to use?
It will be interesting to see
It will be interesting to see how many Catholics take path other than that offered to liberal lemmings as occurred during 2008. I even heard a priest indicate that the policy of that administration should not prevent a Catholic from voting for him. I now reflect and wonder how so many of those Catholics who did vote for this administration will ponder what they are going to do for 2012 especially in view of the latest stand by the Obama administration on creating a mandate that takes away religious liberty of the Church (The H&HS mandate that Catholic institution support birth control etc.) It is also interesting to see certain Catholics and those attacking the Church stance on the policy raise the issue of priests and the molestations of the past. It is as though there is a need to castigate the Church's faith and stance regarding life by using a moral issue created by a few. The Church is a body of many. Not just priests. And, many of our priests should not be put into the category of those who have molested.
"Maybe the hatred of
"Maybe the hatred of Republicans for President Obama will be enough to get their people to the polls in November, but..."
So true! Hatred of Obozo. But what's not to love about using raw Federal power and punishment so that innocent little babies can get their brains sucked out and skulls smashed through all forms of abortion?
I commend you for holding the contrary to hatred, of this despicable Prez.
Post new comment