RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

More on the Myth of Low Turnout Republican Voters

I love the frenzied, hysterical reaction of the crazed Obama supporters to my earlier post. They were crawling over my post about the Bullshit Meme that Republican Voter turnout is low. I realize those brain-dead, nitwits are beyond the reach of reason, but for the rest of you here are the full numbers. We are talking about voting primaries. We are not talking about the caucuses. Why?

A genuine primary election allows people to participate. Unlike a caucus, which is held only for a limited time period (usually during hours when working people cannot attend), a primary allows early voting and provides a twelve hour window (at least) when voters can show up and do their thing. Comparing caucus numbers to a primary vote is complete bullshit. They are two completely different cats.

The media story line, which is a lie, is that Republican turnout for primary votes is down. If you use the NY Times link you can look at each state that has held a contest. It tells you clearly which state has held a caucus or a vote.

So far, thirteen states have held voting primaries. And the results?

In 2008 Republicans cast 8,678,317 votes. In 2012? 8,654,163 votes. Only a difference of less than 25,000 votes in 2012. That is not a statistically significant difference. The major change is in two states–Florida and Virginia. In Virginia in 2008 there were four candidates on the ballot. In 2012, because of the incompetence of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, only two. If those two had been on the ballot do you really believe that the numbers would be the same? Hell no.

What about Florida? 300,000 fewer people voted in 2012. However, the top vote getter in Florida in 2008 was John McCain, who received 701,761 votes. So what about 2012? Mitt Romney got 775,014 votes. Significantly more than McCain achieved.

If you exclude the votes in Florida and Virginia, the numbers tell a story of a dramatic increase in Republican participation. 6,239,567 votes in 2008 versus 6,718,995 in 2012. That’s just shy of 500,000.

The numbers tell the story. Except for two states, Republicans are turning out in larger numbers for the voting primaries in 2012. If Republicans did not care or were growing weary, the votes over the last three weeks tell a dramatically different story. The number of Republicans going to the polls in Alabama, Mississippi and Illinois increased by more than 200,000 votes.

Those are stark facts, not opinion. Yet the media would have you believe that Republicans are staying home and not voting. It is a damned lie. But when it comes to re-electing Obama, lies are all the Democrats can count on.

  • Pingback: Shocker–Republican Voter Turnout Up : NO QUARTER

  • ehuntert

    nice  work–another mainstream press lie exposed!!!!

  • Anonymous

    Thank you Larry, you da man.

  • Anonymous

    Agree with you Larry.  The dems and the msm lied in 2008 and got away with it.  But they forget they’re are a lot of former Hillary supporters who “never returned to the fold” and have not forgotten.  This time we’re prepared and we’re part of the reason for the “bigger numbers” in the republican primaries.  

  • Anonymous

    Republicans are  going to the polls

  • Anonymous

    backtrack tell congress “screw you ” we will give taxpayer money to a country that thanks to me is now run by the muslim brotherhood.
    they do a great job of terrorizing women ,including nuns

    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/03/20/obama-regime-flips-congress-the-bird-will-resume-1-5-billion-in-military-aid-for-muslim-brotherhood-run-egypt/

    • Anonymous

      Obama has put the Muslim Brotherhood in power in Egypt?

      Funny stuff. Another quality NQ comment.

      Someone should tell the Muslim Brotherhood that they are in power and that Obama put them there. I am sure that will be news to them.

    • Anonymous

      Obama has put the Muslim Brotherhood in power in Egypt?

      Funny stuff. Another quality NQ comment.

      Someone should tell the Muslim Brotherhood that they are in power and that Obama put them there. I am sure that will be news to them.

    • Anonymous

       US Secretary of State Clinton to use waiver of authority to allow military aid to Egypt to go ahead: Senator Leahy’s office – @Reuters

  • Anonymous

     House Speaker
    John Boehner expressed frustration over the budget process in Congress
    Thursday, saying the Democratic-controlled Senate has “done nothing” in
    three years by failing to “move” a budget.

    “We’re over here in the House actually working on a budget; going
    through the real work that it takes to come to grips with our fiscal
    problems,” Boehner said at his weekly press briefing at the Capitol.

    “The Senate’s done nothing. There have been no markups over in the Senate. There ain’t even been any effort in the Senate – 3 years, 3 years and they’ve failed to move a budget.”
    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/22/boehner-on-budget-the-senate-done-nothing-in-3-years-video/#ixzz1prneyyOm

  • Anonymous

    This is how desperate they are getting.

    Obama Blames Congress for Solyndra

    President Obama denied culpability for the failure of solar firm
    Solyndra in a radio interview on Tuesday, instead pinning the blame on
    Congress and the Chinese.

    http://nation.foxnews.com/solyndra/2012/03/22/obama-blames-congress-solyndra

  • Anonymous

    This is how desperate they are getting.

    Obama Blames Congress for Solyndra

    President Obama denied culpability for the failure of solar firm
    Solyndra in a radio interview on Tuesday, instead pinning the blame on
    Congress and the Chinese.

    http://nation.foxnews.com/solyndra/2012/03/22/obama-blames-congress-solyndra

  • Anonymous

    This is how desperate they are getting.

    Obama Blames Congress for Solyndra

    President Obama denied culpability for the failure of solar firm
    Solyndra in a radio interview on Tuesday, instead pinning the blame on
    Congress and the Chinese.

    http://nation.foxnews.com/solyndra/2012/03/22/obama-blames-congress-solyndra

    • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

      What’s desperate is trying to manufacture a scandal out of one company’s failure. There’s absolutely nothing to this.

      • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

        Nah, only a few billion wasted dollars had anything to do with Solyndra.  Buy a freakin’ clue, UID.

        • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

          Sometimes things don’t work out – that doesn’t mean there’s a scandal. Stop trying to create something where there’s nothing just for political gain. It’s obvious and pathetic.

          Just imagine if the GOP in the House were actually working on something constructive instead of playing all of these political games — perhaps the economy would be doing even better.

          • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

            The above idiocy is some of the best comedy coming from the left lately.  

          • Anonymous

            When you keep spending other people’s money on things that “don’t work out” to the tune of billions of taxpayer dollars, it is a scandal. Or it is to anyone that isn’t so partisan that they excuse any action from their team and excoriate the other team no matter what they do.

            The House has proposed several budgets. You don’t have to like them to acknowledge that they have done the hard work. That’s not playing politics you dolt, that’s doing their job. The playing politics part comes in when Harry Reid won’t even bring them to the floor.

            If ignorance if bliss you must be very happy.

  • Anonymous

    Bwaaaaah

    Look where they have to drum up support from.   PATHETIC

     
    VA Middle School Students Forced to Support Obama Campaign

    The assignment was for students to research the backgrounds and
    positions of each of the GOP candidates for president and find
    “weaknesses” in them, the parent explained. From there, students were to
    prepare a strategy paper to exploit those weaknesses and then to send
    their suggestions to the Obama campaign.

    Liberty teacher Michael Denman, who declined to comment, unveiled the
    assignment in mid-January when he broke the Civics Honor’s class into
    four groups, one for each Republican candidate. The students were then
    to collaborate as a group and research the backgrounds of their assigned
    candidate.

    Denman assigned two kids to write a paper revealing the identified
    “weaknesses,” two to write the attack strategy paper and two others to
    locate an individual inside the Obama campaign to whom they could send
    the information.

    “My classmates don’t actually know a lot, but a few of us tended to
    agree that the most recent instruction on this project just didn’t seem
    right,” one of the students told TheDC. “Mr. Denman didn’t tell us where
    to find the information, just to research on them.”

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/03/va-middle-school-students-forced-to-support-obama-campaign/

    • Anonymous

      It’s pretty low when you have to propagandize 8th graders. Or pretty desperate. Denman should be fired. He’s unfit to teach in a country where it isn’t SOP to propagandize school children. He would be more at home in Russia, where it is.

    • Anonymous

      It’s pretty low when you have to propagandize 8th graders. Or pretty desperate. Denman should be fired. He’s unfit to teach in a country where it isn’t SOP to propagandize school children. He would be more at home in Russia, where it is.

    • Anonymous

      It’s pretty low when you have to propagandize 8th graders. Or pretty desperate. Denman should be fired. He’s unfit to teach in a country where it isn’t SOP to propagandize school children. He would be more at home in Russia, where it is.

  • Anonymous

    PANIC is starting to set in with the O`Dumbo campaign.

     
    Obama Vows to Drill “Everywhere We Can”… Except ANWR, Florida, Virginia, The Continental Shelf, Utah, Alaska and Ohio

    The White House has struggled in recent days to win the
    debate on gas prices, with Obama appearing at college campuses and
    manufacturing facilities to tout his energy strategy.

    Wednesday’s appearance in New Mexico reflected a pivot of sorts as the White House looked to change the optics on the issue.

    It’s a good thing the media is in his pocket or he would have a much harder time trying to fool the American people.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/03/obama-vows-to-drill-everywhere-we-can-except-anwr-florida-virginia-utah-texas-new-mexico-berring-sea-ohio/

    • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

      “Panic”? Are you sure that’s not laughter over the latest gaffe from Mr. Etch-A-Sketch’s campaign? 

      John Kerry was defined as a “flip flopper” because of one quote … Mitt Romney has flip flopped on almost every single issue … think about that.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/SKNQWFEQCVDZDWKOEWCAZGHKWA Carla

        Obama flipped flopped all over the place during his campaign and he still got elected.

        • Anonymous

          Carla why don’t you give us some examples of Obama flip flopping during the campaign?

        • Anonymous

          He’s still flip-flopping. He just has a poodle media that doesnt’ report on his flip-flops, gaffs and outright lies.

        • Anonymous

          He’s still flip-flopping. He just has a poodle media that doesnt’ report on his flip-flops, gaffs and outright lies.

        • Anonymous

          He’s still flip-flopping. He just has a poodle media that doesnt’ report on his flip-flops, gaffs and outright lies.

      • Anonymous

        While the obamamedia pursues with an obsessive bias everything that is perceived as a “gaff” by Romney they ignore every flip-flop by Obama. He is just keeping even with the biased and dishonest MSM presstitutes on his side. Imagine if he had to compete, like Mitt Romney,with all the left and a good share of the right attacking him  constantly.

        Obambi would be curled up in a corner sucking his thumb.

        Laughter? That would be the sound coming after Prezdint Doofus saying he was going to make sure the “Cushing” pipeline was built. 1/2 a pipeline? Seriously?

      • Anonymous

        While the obamamedia pursues with an obsessive bias everything that is perceived as a “gaff” by Romney they ignore every flip-flop by Obama. He is just keeping even with the biased and dishonest MSM presstitutes on his side. Imagine if he had to compete, like Mitt Romney,with all the left and a good share of the right attacking him  constantly.

        Obambi would be curled up in a corner sucking his thumb.

        Laughter? That would be the sound coming after Prezdint Doofus saying he was going to make sure the “Cushing” pipeline was built. 1/2 a pipeline? Seriously?

  • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

    Relevant: 
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/153272/Romney-Santorum-Stir-Less-Enthusiasm-McCain.aspx

    According to this Gallup polling comparison; GOP voters were more enthusiastic for John McCain in 2008 then they are for the Etch A Sketch in 2012.

    • Anonymous

       Liverpool is whistling past the graveyard, when in fact they are scared shitless about the general.

      • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

        Just not true. Obviously we (Democrats) expect the general to be a battle. Only a fool would expect anything less – but I’d much rather be in our position than yours.

        • Anonymous

          HAha, most Obots have already taken their victory lap for 2012, and some are now looking to Biden in 2016, lol

          http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74335.html

          • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

            Like I said – I’d rather be in our position than yours. I think we have a much better candidate and I think the economy will continue to improve. 

            But – it’s still very early and anything can happen in 8 months. That’s a century in today’s political climate.

            • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

              yeah, but, but, sputter, sputter, sputter…..LOL!

            • Anonymous

              Whatever gave you the impression anyone gives a rat’s ass what you think?

            • Anonymous

              Whatever gave you the impression anyone gives a rat’s ass what you think?

          • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

            Like I said – I’d rather be in our position than yours. I think we have a much better candidate and I think the economy will continue to improve. 

            But – it’s still very early and anything can happen in 8 months. That’s a century in today’s political climate.

          • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

            I know, Biden???  LOL!  Looks as if they know some solid internals and KNOW 2012 is up in smoke1

        • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

          Liverpoop is an UID.

        • Anonymous

          Yawn. Who cares about what you’d rather?

          I’d rather you went away but that ain’t gonna happen. Trolls never do.

        • Anonymous

          Yawn. Who cares about what you’d rather?

          I’d rather you went away but that ain’t gonna happen. Trolls never do.

  • Anonymous

    OT-

    Oh, geez. The latest NYC madam apparently has named John Edwards as one of the “johns” who were her customers.  

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/22/john-edwards-millionaire-madam-anna-gristina-upper-east-side-_n_1372316.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D145636

    • Anonymous

      Sweet

    • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

      John Edwards is no longer relevant… how about a current Senator with just as much dirt on him? Republican David Vitter. … the fact that that guy got reelected really tells you everything you need to know about right wing moralizing. They throw it all out the door when its one of their own.

      • Anonymous

        it’s the people who vote for the different politicians.  so if Vitter survived, it’s because the people of LA reelected him.

        • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

          My point exactly. The Republicans of Louisiana only care about “morals” when it’s a Democrat. This goes for Republicans nationwide. They are hypocrites.

          Compare this to the reaction to Anthony Weiner (whose “crimes” were very mild in comparison – and in fact were not actual crimes at all) … Dems were quick to cut him loose. 

          It’s a very different culture. Democrats are too quick to disown their own for moral failings and Republicans always look the other way when it’s their own people … while simultaneously creating mythological moral failures for their opponents (look at all of the garbage made up about President Obama who is the most moral President we’ve had in generations.)

          • Anonymous

            You once again show that you don’t know what the hell you are talking about. At least try to get your facts straight pinhead.

      • Anonymous

        Shall we chat, chat, chat about Larry Sinclair?  Vera Baker?  

        But, you amuse me….  Do go on….

        • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

          Oh and let’s not forget the conveniently dead choir director and typical white grandma in the wake of the Obatitanic….Reggie Love, anyone?

        • Anonymous

          Or Anthony Weiner and his weinermobile?

        • Anonymous

          Or Anthony Weiner and his weinermobile?

      • Anonymous

        David Vitter was never a political party’s Vice Presidential nominee or a candidate for President as well as the fave of Daily Kos.

  • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

    Don’t the liberals get it?  

    It’s:   “___Anyone____________but Obama for president!”

    Doesn’t matter what spin game they play in the media or what they try to spin or spit or spill (feces in NY, classy, not) to intimidate people into thinking that Obama needs another four years to complete his delusion of grandeur.

    • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

      Anyone but Mr. Etch A Sketch for President! We don’t need a chronic liar in the White House. 

      • Anonymous

        We already have one of those.  Romney would be a breath of fresh air

        • Anonymous

           backtrack’s theme song

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmIoBYzvYCI

          • Anonymous

            ROLF :)

          • Anonymous

            Love it! Although I liked it better when Jane Powell and Fred Astaire did it in Royal Wedding. Still it is so appropriate.

        • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

          Mr. Etch A Sketch is the biggest flip flopper in US politics history. No amount of you guys sticking your heads in the sand will change that. The American people are going to see example after example after example of the 1000s of lies the Etch A Sketch has told… everyone will know the truth: Everything The Etch A Sketch Candidate says is a lie.

          • Anonymous

             I think the head turd has him beat

            1. Keeping Guantanamo open
            2. Bringing back military tribunals for terror suspects
            3. Continuing renditions of terror suspects
            4. Ordering military action in Libya without seeking Congressional authorization
            5. Dropping Third Site missile defenses in order to appease the Russians

            6. Letting Sudan off the hook for the Darfur genocide

            7. Backing a federal Europe after defending national sovereignty
            8. Pledging to restore America’s standing in the world but lowering it instead
            9. Dumping Mubarak in Egypt after calling him a “stalwart ally”

            10. Killing the NASA manned space programThe list is endless.

            • Anonymous

              That list is comical and serious stuff.

              Do you have any proof or facts to go along with any of those points? Anything?

              Good luck taking that BS into the 2012 election.

            • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

              No President can make good on every single campaign promise – that’s a far different thing than completely changing positions on everything for political expediency. 

          • Anonymous

            Dude, seriously…. – calling out Romney for being a flip flopper while you defend the biggest scam artist who ever planted his ass in the Oval Office?    Surely you may be in need of medication….  
            Mitt Romney is far more experienced and able to lead our country and repair our economy than The Changeling could ever hope to be.

            BTW, how are things going on your side of the pond?

            • Anonymous

               Wow       Liverpool has 13 comments and only 1 like.

              You will have to do better than that mate, or you will never ferry across the Mersey.

              • Anonymous

                What a wanker…

            • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

              I don’t live in Liverpool, broseph! Just a fan of the city ;)

          • Anonymous

            I agree Romney is likely going to be the most dishonest candidate ever to run for President.

      • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

        That’s cuz we already have a chronic liar in the White  House.  

        Seriously do the hotels in Liverpool know that you are linking them to your stupidity?

      • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

        That’s cuz we already have a chronic liar in the White  House.  

        Seriously do the hotels in Liverpool know that you are linking them to your stupidity?

      • Anonymous

        Nope we all ready have one. And I’ll bet you voted for him.

    • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

      Anyone but Mr. Etch A Sketch for President! We don’t need a chronic liar in the White House. 

  • Anonymous

    “I love the frenzied, hysterical reaction of the crazed Obama supporters to my earlier post. They were crawling over my post about the Bullshit Meme that Republican Voter turnout is low.”

    I
    can understand people wanting to express their viewpoint or show their
    opposition to a candidate. Or maybe they want to state that they have a
    deep dislike for someones personal opinion. But the reaction you got
    your previous article IMHO borders on or maybe crosses the line on
    pathological obsession. And I say this knowing that there may be one or
    more people on the payroll of the Obama campaign. Still I don’t think
    all the responses were from professionals.These people didn’t seen to
    know when to stop beating the horse long after the poor thing was dead.  

    • Anonymous

      You know what’s really “frenzied” and “hysterical?”

      A follow-up post based on stubborn unwillingness to respond to a simple mathematical point — that as a percentage of the voting population, Republican turnout IS down — and an equally stubborn unwillingness to pack it in and admit defeat. THAT’S obsessive.

      And if you want to talk about “hysterical,” no better example than the delusion that those who disagree with you simply MUST be paid operatives. That’s just a hoot.

      • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

        You just can’t stand to be wrong, can you?  Pathetic.

        • Anonymous

          Wrong how?

          You’ve got NOTHING other than “you’re wrong.” Nothing. How is this untrue?

          “as a percentage of the voting population, Republican turnout IS down”

          • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

            Statistics dipshyt.  If you only have 5 questions and you miss 1 of them you only get 80%correct.  If you have 50 questions and you miss 10 of them you get 80%.  If you have 100 questions and you miss 20 of them you still get 80%….which 80% has more meaning than the other?  It’s all in the interpretation.

            • Anonymous

              That response is a genuine head-scratcher, even for this site.

              Yes, I understand how percentages work. Now let’s walk through this again:

              In 2008, around 8.6 million Republicans had voted by this point. In 2012, that number is about the same.

              The number of conservative voters is larger this year than it was in 2008. This is because population steadily increases over time.

              Now pay attention, because this is the key thing: when you divide 8.6 million by some number, and then again by a LARGER number, the second result will be smaller than the first.

              Right? Right.

              Your 80% example is just pointless. Yes, if the numerator and denominator vary in proportion with each other, the percentage stays the same. But that isn’t what’s happening here. Here, the numerator (votes cast) is the same, and only the denominator (eligible population) is changing.

              Back to 5th-grade math for you, I guess.

              • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

                percentages idiot…someone is trying to argue percentages to actual one to one correlation …
                Honestly, Patty Murray just released a boo hoo email on percentages this afternoon as a talking point.  

                What time do they let you out of the basement?

                • Anonymous

                  So your response is that you have no response. It does appear that what I said — “as a percentage of the voting population, Republican turnout IS down” — is correct, and you cannot refute it. Or at least, you are going to make no attempt to refute it.

                  Gotcha. 

                  And I actually had to google Patty Murray just now, so, y’know. Not getting any information there.

            • http://noquarterusa.net Larry Johnson

               Veronica,
              I appreciate your effort to use reason and intelligence to try to communicate in a civil way with the obots, like win43, but they are total fucking morons and adamant about not accepting basic facts.

              Thanks for being so smart in your comments.  Others do appreciate it.

              I will only take time to respond to the stupidity of win43 or PPAA if I have absolutely nothing else to do.

              That’s a course of action you may want to consider.

              • Anonymous

                Hi there.

                I certainly accept the “basic facts” you present above, if you’re talking about vote totals.

                It remains baffling that you won’t accept, let alone engage, the equally basic fact that there are more Republicans today than there were four years ago, and a lower proportion has voted in the primaries this year than that year.

                Really, this isn’t a controversial idea — it’s a matter of simple mathematics. What it MEANS is another story, but this is just math: (x/y) > (x/(y+1)). How that fact is spun, I don’t really care. But you can’t deny that as a factual matter, it is TRUE.

                I mean, it’s hilarious that I’m a “fucking moron” simply for pointing out a mathematical truth. This has gone well past the point of being bizarre.

              • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

                Thanks Larry!  

              • Anonymous

                LJ the genius regarding the economy and now on voter participation.

                Still waiting for the Tsunami of a double dip.

                The man who rails against “liberals”, but has made a good living off government and taxpayers. Sometimes I wonder if you are only supporting the GOP and Romney because of your self interest to keep the security and defense budgets as high as possible. Maybe that is why you run this website.

        • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

          The problem is he’s clearly not wrong.

        • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

          The problem is he’s clearly not wrong.

          • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

            Clearly not wrong?  Did you get your talking points from Patty Murray – cuz I did too and they were pure BS!

      • Anonymous

         Actually what I said was:

        1) “And I say this knowing that there may be one or
        more people on the payroll of the Obama campaign.”

        or

        2) ” But the reaction you got your previous article IMHO borders on or maybe crosses the line on
        pathological obsession.”

        Your choice.

  • Anonymous

    I think the whole issue of primary voter turnout is a trumped up issue by the left Obama-loving media.

    The fact is that most voters from either party are not fully engaged in the political process if it is not Election Day and a major election (i.e. President, Senator, Governor, etc.).

    Even with that, you will always see a larger turnout of voters in contest where there are two or more viable candidates. When there is only one viable candidate, then it is likely more people will just ignore it and stay home.

    Four years ago the GOP had the leading candidates like John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Mike Huckabee – all were credible Presidential candidates.

    This year most voters do not see either Gingrich or Santorum as credible Presidential candidates. Even in polls where the preference for Santorum is not far behind Romney, when the question is asked who is most likley to beat Obama, Romney is favored decisively.

    The only turnout that will count will be the one in November. Given the state of the economy which is going to get much worse (inflation driven by exploding oil prices and a weak dollar) turnout will be high except for the far left disenchanted former supporters of Obama. I don’t care what someone like James Hoffa says, as long as gas prices stay this high you can count on teamsters voting and voting for Republicans. The same can be said for other union workers who are directly affected by the escalating prices at the pump and on the shelf.

    • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

      Especially when you consider how much more competitive this year’s nomination battle has been (McCain had it wrapped up a long time ago in 2008) it’s quite obvious that there’s been a drop off in voter participation this time around.

      It’s also quite obvious that Mr. Etch A Sketch does not inspire excitement anywhere outside of Utah.

      • Anonymous

        You might want to re-think that talking point before you continue spreading it around like manure.  He’s got us NYC residents pretty excited.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/XEDHO55LWYQG4LL5WIPYHHMDSI miriam

          Another point in addition to the the valid one about potential GOP primary voters not bothering to go to the polls because they assume Romney will win.  These primaries do not reflect enthusiasm for the Fall election, because in many states like New York cross-overs are not allowed. A registered Democrat cannot vote in the NY Republican primary. But many of those Democrats like myself now consider themselves Independents and if the Obama campaign is counting on those voters in the Fall it will be sadly disilllusioned.

          I don’t think the Democratic party still has any idea how many members it lost in the infuriating shenanigans that was the Hillary-Obama primary debacle.  But the party is about to find out.         

          • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

            OMG. That’s hilarious! They’re about to find out how the primary of 2008 is going to hurt them???!?! Don’t you think that they would have found that out in November of 2008??? 

            This is such an incredibly delusional view… it’s hard to believe that a real person actually has it. It’s like that fool who thought he was interviewing Bono… 

        • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

          Ha! Yah! Romney will do really well in NYC … he might even get to double digits. 

          • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

            NY City – the land of feces in the banks – yummY!

            The UID’s are out…LOL!!!

            • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

              This sounds like a battle between Veronica & Anthony… yes you see right wingers hate NYC… except right after 9/11? … 

              • Anonymous

                You better watch what you say, Hotelier.

                First of all, I’m not a right winger.  Been an Indie all my life, and voted D until 2008, when I proudly voted for McCain.  Fact is, he was (and is) still much more trustworthy than The Changeling.

                Secondly, don’t mention 9/11 to a new Yorker in that tone.  I don’t care who the fuck you think you might be, but you will be put in your place.  

                Get it?  

                Good.  

                Now, shut the fuck up about such things.  

                • Anonymous

                   I heard the same rhetoric from the bots before the 2010 election. All I said to them was, “Be afraid Dems be very afraid”. Guess what I was right.

      • Anonymous

        Over the summer and into the Fall when gas prices are over $4 per gallon and grocery tabs have increased 10% then voters won’t give a crap about Obama’s condescending arrogant claims and he will be voted out of office by a huge margin.

        I thought this was going to be a close election until recently. Obama’s ignorance and arrogance concerning energy and its resulting effect on inflation will cost him tremendously.

        • Anonymous

          yeah, the last segment of a pipline that has the first part never built…Keystone Cop the “One” is. Fast track my ass.

          • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

            The Pipeline will *zero* effect on gas prices. It’s not even for an American company.

            • Anonymous

              You are saying BO being the crude pipeline that he is has no effect on the price of oil? /snark off lol$ Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone with Nextel Direct Connect

              • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

                Was that English?

        • Anonymous

          yeah, the last segment of a pipline that has the first part never built…Keystone Cop the “One” is. Fast track my ass.

        • Anonymous

          yeah, the last segment of a pipline that has the first part never built…Keystone Cop the “One” is. Fast track my ass.

        • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

          Most voters are smart enough to know the President has no control over gas prices. 

          And unfortunately for the Republican lie machine: Gas prices tend to go down before November… so this whole thing will be much ado about nothing (as per usual.) 

          See: If the GOP wants to blame Obama for gas prices now (which is obvious BS to anyone who is paying attention – Obama has actually increased domestic oil production) then they’ll likewise have to give him credit when they fall before November (as they almost always do.)

          • Anonymous

            “Most voters are smart enough to know the President has no control over gas prices.”

            Keep chanting what Obama tells you as a loyal member of his cult.

            In the middle of July 2008 GW Bush by executive order allowed off shore drilling at a time when oil prices had escalated for about 5 months. A week after the order prices began to come down and did so each and every week for the balance of the year and until Obama became President.

            Obama is way over his head and has recently been shown to be an outright liar by the industry.

            So take your ignorant pandering elsewhere where other Obama cult members will agree with you.

            • Anonymous

              LOL, that tired shit again? The ol’ Presidential magic wand argument? Zip, presto, a stroke of the pen and prices go down! All POTUS needs to do is “signal” to the world that at some indefinite point in the future, after lease sales, exploration, and drilling are complete (which takes years), a few more offshore rigs will go up… increasing global oil supply by a whole tenth of one percent! Oh boy, that will show those gas prices who is boss! Right?

              LOL, the myths people will swallow are just amazing.

              By the way, after that magical Bush executive order, gas price actually only fell for two months, then jumped up for another week. Then they fell off a cliff when Lehman failed and the global economy ground to a halt:

              http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx 

              I guess it’s fair to give Bush credit for the latter, if you want.

              • Anonymous

                Holy cow!!! You can’t even read a simply chart??? Look at the 5 year trend and how much gas fell from mid-july in 2008 all the way until Obama took office – what a coincidence.
                http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

                • Anonymous

                  Heck of a non-response, there.

                  And again, this is old terrain for you and me. You think the global financial panic going on in the months leading up to Obama taking office had nothing to do with gas prices.

                  And I think that’s one of the stupidest fucking things I’ve ever heard. Global recession = low global demand for energy = low energy prices. Go read a book, or find some other way to stop embarrassing yourself.

                  • Anonymous

                    Look moron, I told you to get a basic education in ecoomics and learning to read charts. Typical ignorant liberal

                • Anonymous

                  Can you provide us any evidence or analysis from anywhere that says either Bush or Obama was responsible for any change in the price of oil? There are 1,000s if nto 10,009s of people that spend their career analyzing the price of oil. Find us just one to prove anything you say.

                  • Anonymous

                    Larry’s right. You are too stupid to respond to. All you are doing is trolling and wasting space because no matter how many times answers are responded to you, you just ignore it and use this space to just antagonize. As I said you and all your psudonyms should get lost.

                • Anonymous

                  Can you provide us any evidence or analysis from anywhere that says either Bush or Obama was responsible for any change in the price of oil? There are 1,000s if nto 10,009s of people that spend their career analyzing the price of oil. Find us just one to prove anything you say.

            • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

              2008 yes… let’s talk about $4/gallon gas in 2008. Gas prices in the summer of 2008 were over $4 and guess what all of the right wingers said at the time: the President cannot control gas prices. This is a rare instance of right wingers telling the truth (they do it on those rare occasions when the truth actually aligns with their political goals.) 

              There is endless evidence of all of the same right wingers who are trying to blame Obama today saying that the President can’t control gas prices in 2008.

              It’s 100% BS and it’s not really that hard to see this. You are going to have to do better than gas prices! (especially because they will almost certainly drop before November! … then what will you have?)

              • Anonymous

                Here’s your problem. You are entitled to your own opinion – not invented facts. GOP always knew thay we could control our own fate with energy.

                Obama is lying about drilling – he islying about solar energy, – he lying about the pipeline – and he is lying about “all of the above.” His career is over. 

                • Anonymous

                  Hokma, why don’t you give us some fact then? Show us some facts that say that Bush was responsible for the drop in the oil price in 2008. Give us any analysis. I am sure there are plenty of oil analysts that published stuff back in 2008 explaining why the price of oil dropped. Find just one that says it was because of Bush.

                  • Anonymous

                    I gave you facts more than once. Your problem is that you are functionally illiterate, incapable of thinking, and too friggin ignroant to form a coherent argument. So why don’t you and all your other speudonyms get lost.

                • Anonymous

                  Hokma, why don’t you give us some fact then? Show us some facts that say that Bush was responsible for the drop in the oil price in 2008. Give us any analysis. I am sure there are plenty of oil analysts that published stuff back in 2008 explaining why the price of oil dropped. Find just one that says it was because of Bush.

            • Anonymous

              Still pendling that crap. So Bush was responsible for the price of oil falling in 2008 because of some so-called order to allow more drilling. The drop in the price of oil had nothing to do with the massive global recession? Keep watching that FOX. It is doing a good job at eroding your brain.

            • Anonymous

              Still pendling that crap. So Bush was responsible for the price of oil falling in 2008 because of some so-called order to allow more drilling. The drop in the price of oil had nothing to do with the massive global recession? Keep watching that FOX. It is doing a good job at eroding your brain.

  • Anonymous

     If Romney can’t deliver the one two punch by May… Its going to become interesting…

    Santorum seeking to coax delegates
    http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2012/03/22/rick_santorum_tries_new_strategy_to_catch_up_with_mitt_romney/

    You can bet that Gingrich and Paul will be trying the same tactic….

    • Anonymous

      If they can pull an obama….?

    • Anonymous

      But the first example was in MO, where Santorum’s people lost out to Romney and Paul during last weekend’s caucuses.  And if we can believe what is going on, party insiders do not support Santorum (that’s why so few have endorsed him).  

       http://www.news-leader.com/article/20120320/NEWS11/303200045/Missouri-Republican-presidential-caucuses-Santorum-Romney-Paul

      • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

        Obviously party insiders are for Romney – they have no choice. 

        Santorum, Gingrich, & Paul are all unthinkable as the nominee. This is exactly the point I’m making: Romney is only going to “win” the nomination by default – everyone else lost it.

    • Anonymous

      Here’s more of the same:

      Paul supporters dominated Saturday’s caucus in Boone County, where he had campaigned two days earlier. They paired with a smaller Romney contingent to elect a slate of 48 Paul delegates and five Romney delegates to advance to the next round in the selection process. Santorum got shut out.
      Santorum supporters also got outflanked in the Republican stronghold of Greene County. A Paul-Romney alliance resulted in a slate allotting 65 delegates to Paul, 40 Romney and six to Santorum.

      A similar alliance also turned back Santorum supporters in the Capitol’s home of Cole County, where Romney backers comprised the bulk of the 35 delegates with some also going to Paul supporters.

      In Franklin County, Santorum carried the plurality on an initial vote of separate delegate slates put forward by the three camps. But during a break, Paul and Romney supporters combined forces, resulting in victory for revised a 40-person delegate slate in which Paul supporters comprised a little less than two-thirds of the delegates and Romney supporters comprised more than one-third. Santorum supporters were left with nothing.

      “The Ron Paul people and the Romney people were willing to work together because they wanted to get some delegates to the next level, and that was the way to do it,” said Jedidiah Smith, a Paul delegate from Franklin County. “It’s not so much that they see eye-to-eye together” on issues.

      A Romney-Paul coalition nearly prevailed in the St. Louis County township of Chesterfield, where Santorum campaigned just hours before Saturday’s caucus. Former U.S. Sen. Jim Talent, a Romney campaign adviser, attempted to broker a compromise that would have provided some delegates for all the presidential campaigns. But Santorum’s group rejected it.

      “It’s perfectly legal to team up,” said Judy Hon, a Chesterfield township committeewoman who led the Santorum contingent. “I asked if the Ron Paul people could be removed and they did not want to make that compromise. So I said, ‘we’ll go for broke.’”

      In the resulting vote, the slate of Santorum delegates narrowly prevailed over a slate that consisted of 16 Romney delegates, three Paul delegates and one delegate for Newt Gingrich.

      The reason for the Romney-Paul alliance is more political and philosophical.

      As the frontrunner, Romney comes out ahead every time Santorum does not win a delegate.

      In that sense, “a vote for Paul is a vote for Romney,” said George Connor, head of the political science department at Missouri State University.

      As the candidate trailing the delegate race, Paul’s best shot at relevance is to gain enough delegates to command a role at the Republican National Convention.

      “What they’re guaranteeing is access to the convention” by teaming with Romney, Connor said.

      Santorum still has a shot at winning the majority of Missouri’s delegates from its eight congressional district conventions and state convention. But if the Romney-Paul alliance remains firm, the result could be a split of Missouri’s 52 delegates among various presidential candidates.

      That would be fine with Romney’s camp.

      “I hope what happens is we get some kind of a split that reflects, I think, the real feeling within the party — because it’s clear to me that it’s split,” Talent said.

      http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/e0920c5f9b3d4ef9b7c54b5335afbba7/MO–Missouri-Caucuses-Analysis/

      • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

        If Etch A Sketch only gains the necessary delegates by gaming the system – that will only make the distaste for him even greater.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/XEDHO55LWYQG4LL5WIPYHHMDSI miriam

          Apparently you weren’t around during the ’08 Democratic primaries.  “Gaming the system” is an understatement for what went on then.  Except that in some instances it wasn’t “gaming” but outright thievery–such as “readjusting” Hillary Clinton votes in Florida.  

          • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

            What was that date in May, 2008 when the Dems perpetrated the biggest fraud in presidential candidacy history?

            Oh – the Larry’s and the Breitbart’s are just getting started…

            • Anonymous

              What fraud would that have been? Same old, same old.

              Can you give use some actual proof of the fraud you speak of?

              You get a tinfoil hat for that comment.

          • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

            Nonsense. Obama won the popular vote and the delegate vote. Yes his campaign was extremely smart about how it went about the campaign but that’s not a negative on him. It’s a negative on Clinton for running such a bad campaign.

            The situation I’m talking about is different. I’m talking about a scenario in which Romney begins to lose state after state and yet still “wins” because of delegate manipulation. Obviously this hasn’t happened… yet… but if it does – there would be a revolt among the GOP base.

    • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

      The Etch A Sketch thing may have just reopened this thing one last time. We’ll see… Romney is extremely lucky that he hasn’t had to face a single serious challenger. The fact is that he’s struggling this much even with the weakest GOP field ever.

      • Anonymous

        “Romney is extremely lucky that he hasn’t had to face a single serious challenger. ”

        So then you agree that the White House and the MSM are not “serious challengers”?  Great.  Figured you’d see the light sooner or later.  Romney will wipe the floor with BO in November.

        • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

          Anthony – purposefully misreading someone’s statement isn’t really how argument works. I was clearly talking about the pathetic Republican field. 
          President Obama is just as clearly a very serious challenger. He’s the President of the United States. He won by a wide margin in 2008. He leads the Etch A Sketch in a majority of polls. 

          I will not pretend like the Etch A Sketch has no chance – he does. The economy could lose steam by November… and certainly American voters sometimes make huge mistakes: See 2000, 2004, & 2010.

          • Anonymous

            The Changeling is only 4 (at most) points ahead of Romney.

            He did not win by a large margin in 2008.  the R&B Committee had to award him delegates from states where he wasn’t even on the ballot, as well as strong-arm Hillary Clinton to concede.

            Were you paying attention to American politics back then?  Or are you just another pathetic paid operative getting into it now?

            • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

              When I said Obama won by a large margin in 2008 I was referring to the general election (obviously!) … why do you keep misreading what I’m saying? It’s not really impressive to keep doing the strawman thing. 

              The Democratic primary was very close (obviously.) That’s not relevant.
              As far as the general election polling … it depends on who you want to believe of course, if you want to stick your head in the sand and go with Rasmussen then it’s a toss-up. If you want to go with reputable polling then Obama has a solid lead.

              That said; polling in March doesn’t mean *that* much. I think the most important things that will lead to Obama’s reelection are these:

              1. An economy that continues to improve. It’s also essential that the Obama team puts this economic recovery in context of the Bush Recession that he inherited (and makes the point that E-A-S’s plan would be a return to Bush’s policy)

              2. Obama’s general likability. He’s a good guy and that goes a long ways for a lot of people. He actually had to earn his accomplishments rather than just be handed them on a silver platter by his family. E-A-S represents the privileged elite, President Obama represents the true American Dream … accomplishment based on hard work and fighting for what’s right.

              3. The Etch-A-Sketch’s terrible reputation as the biggest flip flopper in political history. Why vote for someone you can’t trust to *ever* tell the truth?

              • Anonymous

                Obama’s general likability? He earned his accomplishments?  Accomplishment based on hard work and fighting for what’s right?

                Are you kidding me??????

                Time for a check-up, I’d say, but keep selling him.  You’re hilarious.

                The Changeling is the least trustworthy POTUS most likely in the history of our country.

                • Anonymous

                  It was Henry Stern of the NY LIberal Party who said Obama had the thinnest resume of any incoming President in history.

        • Anonymous

          Anthony… Wait until Romney meets the Chicago meat grinder… This will be one dirty general election. One can only hope Romney is up to the challenge….

          Do not underestimate Axelrod….

  • Anonymous

    You have to do another post because you got you ass handed to you in the last one?

    “Comparing caucus numbers to a primary vote is complete bullshit.”

    That is a lie. If you know how many people particpate in each type of election it still gives you an idea of particpation in the process and turn-out. As far as the number of people voting it does not matter whether it is a primary election or a caucus. There is some number of people that vote in either, which reflect participation. However, some caucuses give us their vote totals and other do not.

    “Those are stark facts, not opinion.”

    Those are the facts that you chose to focus on, but no one else focuses on those numbers. Again, you are only using total votes. What is more important is the turn-out in terms of percentages of voters actually voting. That is the way turn-out has always been measured. You are just spinning, by not focusing on percentages, which is the standard for measuring turn-out.

    However, even if we use total numbers, the turn-out for the GOP this year has not been very strong and arguably weak.

    Just from population growth alone, which is 1% a year, the GOP vote is not even keeping up with population growth.

    Lets use your numbers:

    2008: 8,679,317

    Where should the vote have been just with population growth?

    8,679,317 x 1.01 x 1.01 x 1.01 x 1.01 = 9,031,732

    2012 vote so far (your numbers): 8,654,163

    That is 377,569 lower than what is should be just to keep up with population growth. So if you were to look at the vote as a percentage of the voting base you would see a pretty big drop in voter particpation.

    Also, 2008 was also a low turn-out year for Republican, so comparing a weak 2012 vote total to a weak 2008 only tells you that 2012 is also a weak turn-out year.

    With all the supposive excitment from NQ, the Tea Party and getting rid of Obama the vote totals should be much higher for the GOP, certainly higher than 2008. Where are all the voters? The GOP vote totals cannot even keep up with population growth, nevermind add more participation around the excitment of getting rid of Obama and around the Tea Party.

    “Republican Turnout Lower Than in 2000 or 2008″

    “Average Republican turnout in the presidential primaries through this week’s Super Tuesday contests has been smaller than the average turnout in the primaries in the same states in both 2008 and 2000, the previous two years of competitive GOP contests.
     Based on final and official results from the six states whose primaries preceded Super Tuesday and near final and unofficial results from the seven Super Tuesday primaries, 7,846,172 voted out of 68,125,000 eligible citizens or 11.5 percent. Turnout in 2008 was 13.2 percent of eligibles and it was 12.2 in 2000.”

    Based on final and official results from the six states whose primaries preceded Super Tuesday and near final and unofficial results from the seven Super Tuesday primaries, 7,846,172 voted out of 68,125,000 eligible citizens or 11.5 percent. Turnout in 2008 was 13.2 percent of eligibles and it was 12.2 in 2000.”

    http://www.bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/2012%20Voter%20Turn%20Out%20Report.pdf

    “Of the 13 states that have held primaries to date, eight had lower turnout than in 2008, according to the report, which was released by the Bipartisan Policy Center and the Center for the Study of the American Electorate.”

    “The report calculated turnout by dividing the total vote in the Republican primary by the state’s voting-age population, which is a “stable and continuing denominator” that changes only with population growth, the report said.”

    http://go.bloomberg.com/political-economy/2012-03-08/republican-turnout-lower-than-in-2000-or-2008/

    • Anonymous

      I piled on yesterday, but I have nothing to add to this. Interesting to see if Larry ever deigns to respond — my guess is all heat and no light again. Funny how those who disagree with him on facts are “mentally retarded” (or whatever he chooses to call you) yet he’s not able to counter their arguments with more than name-calling. Funny, or maybe just sad.

      • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

        Bloomberg?

        • Anonymous

          You should read the post a little closer before you comment.

          Try:

          “Bipartisan Policy Center and the Center for the Study of the American Electorate”

          Read their study that I reference and make-up your own mind.

          • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

            Again, Bloomberg?

            • Anonymous

              Again you are not even bothering to look at the link? On link is to a group that actually studies this stuff and one is to a Bloomberg article that metions the report released by that group.

              What is your point?

      • Anonymous

        And yet Larry still lets you express yourselves despite your personal insults. This says a lot about him.
         

        • Anonymous

          Personal insults? Where?

          The only personal insults are in the LJ posts. His website.

      • Anonymous

        HAha, PPAA gets all nuanced regarding population growth when it’s about Larry’s assertion on voter turnout, but when presented with population growth when it’s in regards to Obama’s unemployment numbers…well, that’s just right wing talking points being spouted by Obama haters.

        FAIL

        • Anonymous

          That’s a good point, actually. Which is it: does population growth matter, or not? Larry sure seems to think it counts with respect to unemployment numbers, and I agree (unemployment is way too high; the recent numbers are good news, but not great news, and we have a very long way to go). Can’t speak for how PPAA tries to spin it, but that’s his/her deal.

          So why doesn’t population growth count when it comes to measuring voter turnout? I see no reason.

          • Anonymous

             I’ll take an easy stab at that. Population growth to unemployment is
            more relative because once somebody is of working age, technically they
            are part of the available work force. That’s true for virtually
            everyone.

            Arguing population growth in regards to GOP turnout is way less relevant
            because it’s subjective on voting age individuals who register. Using
            PPAA’s theory, if population growth is relevent to GOP turnout, you
            would think that GOP voter indentification would be increasing, but it’s
            not, it’s declining.

            http://www.gallup.com/poll/151943/record-high-americans-identify-independents.aspx

            As I said…FAIL

            • Anonymous

              That’s a perfectly logical explanation. In that case, the problem isn’t that Republicans aren’t enthusiastic — it’s that the GOP brand sucks right now.

              I might quibble with that a little, given that Gallup has the “Republican/Lean Republican” identification at its highest point in almost 10 years. Maybe conservatives aren’t calling themselves “Republicans” as much any more, but they are still Republicans for the purposes of counting votes (and counting voters).

              But really, I’m fine with your theory that Republican primary turnout is failing to keep pace with population growth because the GOP itself is shrinking. And it’s nice to see someone actually articulating an argument for once.

            • Anonymous

              That’s a perfectly logical explanation. In that case, the problem isn’t that Republicans aren’t enthusiastic — it’s that the GOP brand sucks right now.

              I might quibble with that a little, given that Gallup has the “Republican/Lean Republican” identification at its highest point in almost 10 years. Maybe conservatives aren’t calling themselves “Republicans” as much any more, but they are still Republicans for the purposes of counting votes (and counting voters).

              But really, I’m fine with your theory that Republican primary turnout is failing to keep pace with population growth because the GOP itself is shrinking. And it’s nice to see someone actually articulating an argument for once.

              • Anonymous

                If the GOP is actually shrinking, although the measurements for voter turn-out are against the general voting population, so that the voter ID issued does not get in the way, then that is worse than a lower voter turn-out.

            • Anonymous

              Furthermore, the population growth is often due to illegals… who are not supposed to work, nor vote. The former is more likely. At least this is the case in CA.

            • http://twitter.com/LHN_UK Liverpool Hotels Now

              GOP voter ID is declining because the Republican Party is crazy. How  does this help prove any point other than it doesn’t matter which one of these losers gets picked – they’ll all get beat by the President.

              • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

                What about the registered Dems that aren’t voting again for  Captain Clueless Obama? 

                Have they given you UIDs any hard stats on that, yet?

            • Anonymous

              Boogie,

              A funny spin on things.

              It is about measuring voter turn-out by looking at the number of people who voted versus the number of people who are qualified to vote.

              If 2 million people voted this year and 1 million voted last year, then great there was more voters this year than last. However, if the number of voters that could vote this year was 10 million and the number that could vote last year 2 million then the participation or turn-out was very poor this year.

              2 million / 10 million = 20%

              1 million / 2 million = 50% 

              The fact that twice as many voted this year than last year tells you nothing about voter enthusiasm or whether voters are really particpating and turning-out. What actually happened was that 8 million people stayed home this year versus only 1 million who stayed home last year or 8 times more people stayed home this year. That real tells you something.

        • Anonymous

           Sometimes the little mouse dosen`t make the wheel go all the way around.

          • Anonymous

            True dat.  He sure does squeak a lot, though.  Incessantly.

        • Anonymous

          Boogie,

          There is a difference. The demographics and a record number of baby boomers retiring is impacting the employment participation rate, whereas a percentage of the voting base that voted is not being impacted by the demographics of the babyboomers. I have not problem looking at the employment participation rate as long as we understand that it has been falling since 2000.  Too bad you cannot understand the difference.

          As I said yesterday, Mr. Johnson discounts looking at voting turn-out as a percentage of total voters, which is the standard way used to measure voter turn-out, but then at the same time insists that we look at employment as a percentage of the labor market. He is completely inconsistent, but par for the course for NQ logic.

          The problem is you cannot always look at things through a political lens or in the NQ case, through a continueous trash Obama lens, as most of the time the facts won’t match your narrative.

      • Anonymous

        Hard to despite an actual study by the non-partisan Bipartisan Policy Center and the Center for the Study of the American Electorate that I reference above. Who are you going to believe a guy who is essentially talking out of his ass based on a few vote numbers or a group of analysts who make a living studying this stuff?

  • Anonymous

    Wouldn’t it be refreshing if the liberals would stop trying to play mind games with us.  They just aren’t equipped to be successful at it.  That old addage about knowing one’s enemy demonstrates the shortcomings of the Democratic party.  They completely misread public sentiment, so immersed are they in their own propaganda. 

    Starting at the top, with a president who exists in a perpetual and probably terminal state of denial and thinks himself invincible, all of them misread the signs, the will of the people, how much we respect our Constitution and do not take lightly attempts to circumvent it’s protections, how aware we are of the duplicitous nature of this administration and how seriously we do not approve of their continuing this takeover of our country.  We know full well that they do not have our best interests at heart.

    The people are fairly crying out for a change.  It will not come from Obama.  Most importantly, they do not hear what the country is telling them.

  • Anonymous

    They need the lower number bullshit to go with the “Republicans aren’t happy with their choices” bullshit.

    Not that some aren’t dissatisfied with the choices. Some are still so pissed off that they choice either dropped out or never got in that they savage those who did and did.

    “Oh if only it had been Huntsman, or Pawlenty, (my particular choice) or Daniels or Christie or Palin or Ryan or” on and on and on.

    Suck it up.Those people either didn’t get in or got out when it was apparent they couldn’t win. A truth that Gingrich either can’t see or is so dimmed by his ego and rage that he is willing to destroy his party because he can’t win.

    Some people are like little kids who are offered a choice of chocolate, vanilla or strawberry ice cream and kick and scream because they can’t have pistachio.

    • Anonymous

        Mitt Romney is almost definitely going to win the nomination – and as of Tuesday, 75% of likely GOP voters also believed
      Romney was going to win the nomination. Why the heck would an ordinary
      person give up their time to vote (especially in a caucus where it takes
      over an hour to do so), if they are relatively certain that a given
      candidate is going to win. It’s no accident that when voters thought
      there was a genuinely competitive contest in South Carolina, they showed
      up in higher numbers.

      Primary turnout in past presidential elections has had little correlation with turnout in the general election. Until 2008, the highest level of turnout for a primary was 1988 when Democrats were looking to beat George HW Bush, but Bush easily won in the fall.

      The reason for no relationship is quite simple. Lack of enthusiasm for
      voting in a primary election is far different from enthusiasm for voting
      against the incumbent party in the general election, and Republicans definitely have the “want” to defeat President Obama.

      • Anonymous

        “Mitt Romney is almost definitely going to win the nomination”

        Leave out the “almost” after the endorsements of Jeb Bush and Freedomworks yesterday.

        • Anonymous

          I agree. Now the only question is how damaged will he emerge from the savaging from his own party?

          • Anonymous

            His own party might see him as damaged from their savaging, but I daresay that many of we Independents (and a lot of disillusioned Obots) will like him just fine enough to vote for him

            • Anonymous

              I bow to your prescience my friend. 

      • Anonymous

        In spite of Little Ricky running around handing out Etch-A-Sketches, how juvenile can you get, it appears most people think he’s done. Done in by his own foolishness.


        Santorum’s Lost Message

         
        by A.B. Stoddard
         
        http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/ab-stoddard/217429-santorums-lost-message

        • Anonymous

          In response to your prior comment to me, I think the only damage in the end that has been done is self-inflicted by Santorum and Gingrich. Compare these two losers to the last cycle when you had Romney, Huckabee, and how they handled themselves. Out of this only Ron Paul will still have respect as will Huntsman and Pawlenty.

        • Anonymous

           I couldn’t agree with very much that article had to say.  Saying that all Rick had to do was stay on message to beat Romney is complete and utter bullshit.  If Rick’s message had been all that great, he would be winning most of the states.  He’s not.    I believe that if Romney wasn’t Mormon, he would have had a much bigger lead.   Romney is a proven businessman, a proven Governor,  a proven leader by bringing success to the Olympics and a good family man.  The only thing he is not, according to the religious right is their definition of a christian.   Santorum and Gingrich, the more you got to know them, the less you liked them.

          • Anonymous

            I did agree with much of what Stoddard had to say. Santorum, IMO, rose because the ABR bunch were/are still looking for a “real” conservative. Santorum’s record in the senate proves that he is no such thing but the ABR bunch don’t bother much with facts as they bounce from one new “hero” to another.

            Santorum might have managed to fool enough of the low information voters to be a real contender if he hadn’t wandered off into the social issues that are where his heart really lies. When he did that he lost a lot of women and Independents. Even the perpetual Romney haters couldn’t swallow his bilge.

            Now the fool is wandering around with an Etch-A-Sketch. The media will help keep this foolishness alive as long as possible but no serious voter can take a candidate seriously that is using the same game plan against Romney as the DNC and who says Romney is the same as Obama.

            But all this is JMO.

    • Anonymous

      chocolate, vanilla or strawberry 
      Golly, Marge, don’t use this analogy in the General. The chocolate part will have somebody calling you racist :)

      • Anonymous

        I figured that one of the asshat troll would now. Not that I give as rat’s ass. They’ve overplayed that card. I know longer care or listen. There seem to be just as many racists in minority communities as out. Not to mention one very obvious one at the DOJ.

    • Anonymous

       All this negative talk about Romney will subside when Romney get closer to the 1144 number. We just need to be patient and let the opposition and media make fools of themselves.

      • Anonymous

        I don’t see any way of stopping the opposition and media making fools of themselves.

        Barky still thinks he’s being clever by using the “flat earth society” line. It would be beneath a president with any class. Thus it suites him just fine.

        As for the media presstitutes, making asses of themselves is about the only thing they are any good at. Reporting? Informing? Perish the thought!

        • http://twitter.com/VeronicaVerona1 Veronica Verona

          Every time Barky uses the flat earth line I automatically think of his IQ.  He’s circling around somewhere south of 90.

          • Anonymous

            I feel the same. You would think that the smart Prezdint evah could speak words less suited to a second rate comedian.

      • Anonymous

         yepper..

  • Anonymous

    Off topic… Thought some of you might be interested in this….

    Oath Keepers,

    The Patriot Coalition has invited me (Stewart Rhodes) to participate in
    a webinar/livestream discussion they have scheduled for tonight, at 6pm
    Pacific time, on the March 16 Obama Executive Order on National Defense
    Resources Preparedness.    We will also be doing a separate
    webinar/live-stream on NDAA tomorrow night.  See below for access info
    for both. 

    This was a last minute invite, so you are getting a
    last minute heads up.  I want to make it clear that I have not done
    in-depth research into this particular Obama Executive Order, and my
    observations tonight on this EO will only be my preliminary thoughts,
    without having done that in-depth research.  Likewise, Patriot Coalition
    leaders and attorneys will only be presenting their initial,
    preliminary thoughts on this EO.  We will follow up with more in depth
    analysis within the next week. 

    With that said, we do believe
    we can at least help provide some useful background to help frame your
    own understanding and help lay a base for further knowledge and
    discussion. 

    One thing to keep foremost in mind is that this
    EO did not come out of nowhere.  It is a modified version of one that
    dates from 1994, during the Clinton Administration.  You can read the
    1994 version here:

    http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/pdf/12919.pdf

    And there are other similar EOs that date back through each
    administration, all through the Cold War, back to Kennedy, Eisenhower,
    Truman, and even back to FDR.

    One in particular I recommend you
    read is a a rather disturbing Executive Order, dating from 1988, during
    the Reagan Administration:

    http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/EO12656.htm

    There is a very useful summary of that Reagan EO, authored by attorneys Herb Titus and William Olson, which you can find here:

    http://www.lawandfreedom.com/site/constitutional/execorders/EO12656Syn.pdf

    And Olson and Titus have a good research and resource page on Executive
    Orders here (though most of it dates from the Clinton years, it is
    useful):

    http://www.lawandfreedom.com/site/executive/index.html#Executive%20Order%20Study

    I consider all such “emergency” Executive Orders, by all the
    Presidents, to be dangerous ticking time bombs.  They are all part of
    the imperial presidency that has grown like a cancer, far beyond the
    bounds of the Constitution, through each and every administration, (yes,
    including Reagan and both Bush’s!) all in the name of keeping us safe
    from communism, and now, from terrorism.  And this latest “contribution”
    by Obama is his way of helping to grow that cancer.  It fits right in
    with all else he has done.

    I will post more on this topic as I
    do more research, and if you would like to join us for the preliminary
    discussion tonight, see below for details on how to do so.  As for the
    NDAA presentation tomorrow night (Thursday, March 22), that is a topic I
    have researched in-depth, and we have a handy powerpoint we will
    present that we think will be worth your while.  Both tonight’s meeting
    and tomorrow night will consist of a one hour presentation followed by a
    question and answer period.  Space is very limited for actually getting
    on the webinar where you can ask questions over the phone, but an
    unlimited number of people can watch the live stream and then type in
    questions.   So, if you can’t access the webinar, join us on the
    livestream. 

    Stewart Rhodes
       IMPORTANT UPDATE:
    DUE TO OVERWHELMING INTEREST IN OUR NDRP AND NDAA WEBINARS, WE ARE
    EXPECTING AN OVERFLOW OF FOLKS WANTING TO ATTEND. ACCESS TO THE
    WEBINAR IS ON A FIRST COME BASIS. FOR THOSE WHO CANNOT GET INTO
    THE WEBINARS, WE WILL ALSO BE LIVE BROADCASTING ON OUR PATRIOT COALITION LIVE! CHANNEL, “WE THE PEOPLE, RESTORING CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE” HERE: http://livestream.com/WRCG

    NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS (NDRP)  PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ORDER (click here)
    Wednesday, March 21, 2012
    6:00 p.m. PACIFIC 7:00p.m. MOUNTAIN 8:00p.m. CENTRAL 9:00 p.m. EASTERN (approximately 1 hour)

    NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT (NDAA) Thursday, March 22, 2012 
    6:00 p.m. PACIFIC 7:00p.m. MOUNTAIN 8:00p.m. CENTRAL 9:00 p.m. EASTERN (approximately 1 hour)

    JOIN WEBINAR HERE:

    https://www.freescreensharing.com/meetings/115-276-577

    JOIN CONFERENCE CALL HERE:
    Dial: (559)546-1200
    Enter the Meeting ID: 115-276-577
    followed by the # key. VIEW LIVE BROADCAST OF WEBINAR AND CHAT HERE: Patriot Coalition LIVE! : http://livestream.com/WRCG (Both webinars will also be archived for sharing/later viewing)
     

    • Anonymous

      Thank you Pop. I appreciate you posting this. I will read it tonight when I have time to concentrate completely on it because it looks like something I should understand.

      I also admire you using your name here. It has become a bit perilous these days.

    • Anonymous

      Good Popsmoke. REX-84

      • Anonymous

        I know the author of REX-84 personally…. Back then he was scary… Today he is not the man that he use to be….

        • TeakWoodKite

          That is someone I would like to ask a few questions of. I was at the recieving end of what he wrote in ’86.
          Ah, but the pen is mightier than the sword, except if it is an M-16 pointed at your head by someone without a warrent.

    • Anonymous

      Oath Keepers.. you are one of those nuts. Are you also a Prepper… storing seeds, food and water in your basement? This explains a lot of things.

  • Anonymous

    I will only agree with Larry with states that are not open primaries. Those numbers one can actually quantify and have actual meaning with regards to party get-out-the-vote programs and the health of the party. The rest? Mental masturbation.

    Now using Larry’s early numbers on Illinois republican votes I would not call 37,634 votes a major upswing or any sign of party health and since this is a “open primary” the Illinois numbers are to early yet and even the State cannot verify them. My biggest issue when quantifying these numbers…

    Ok, so for the sake of argument, using these numbers we can say there was an increase.  But realize this increase is minor when compared to the total registered voter count of approximately 7 Million. We can mental masturbate these number all we want. But the fact is that the Total Ballots Cast Turnout Rate for 2012 in Illinois was DOWN (10.4% Incomplete waiting on democratic numbers/not expected to increase by much) in comparison to  2008 (33.8%)… Mississippi total comparison so far,   2012 (13.5% incomplete), 2008 (27.5) and even Florida 2008 (34.0%) 2012 (12.8% incomplete). This shows that voters are not engaged and is not a good trend sign for the general.

    I would not use the NYT to paper a bird cage and Huffington Post just reprints RSS feeds, raw numbers…. But here is another link for reference http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm. Again in many contests these number are still very preliminary.

    Moreover these numbers in many open primary states do not necessarily indicate a positive by any means. Hell I can say the reason why republican number are up in open primary states is because there
    is no presidential democratic primary and people are running to the
    polls to try and offset the republicans.

    Lets be fair to CBS as well… http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/03/15/early-voting-wrapping-up-for-primary-low-turnout-expected-tuesday/

    “CHICAGO (CBS) – With Illinois a player in the
    Republican primary election for the first time in decades, the number of
    voters asking for a GOP ballot is up, but election officials still
    expect low turnout overall.”

    There is and was truth in this statement……

  • Anonymous

    I love the frenzied, hysterical reaction of the crazed Obama supporters to my earlier post.

    I love the smell of napalm in the morning too.

    • Anonymous

      Lol! HAhahaha!!!!

  • Pingback: Low Voter Turnout, My Ass — UPDATE : NO QUARTER

  • Anonymous

    Larry, see the comments section on your previous post same subject.  win42 just pissed himself and blew his op in a single open-ended elicitation.  These guys are too easy.

    • Anonymous

      Hahaha, okay. You must see guys in trench cloaks lurking around every corner. My “op”… that’s too funny.

      (ps: if you’re curious, I’m a bored lawyer who likes shooting fish in barrels)

      • Anonymous

        That is the prerequisite for being a lawyer.

        • Anonymous

          Heh. It doesn’t hurt. Truth is the hard cases are more fun, though.

      • Anonymous

        Well, you’re falling for it and wasting time replying to my bullshit.  That’s really what it’s all about.

  • Anonymous

    OT- interesting article on Afghanistan:

    “It appears that the staff sergeant who murdered those Afghan villagers had cracked under the stresses of a war we won’t allow our troops to fight. But the real madness is at the top, in the White House, where President Obama can’t see past the November election; in Congress, where Republicans cling to whatever war they’ve got; and in uniform, where our generals have run out of ideas and moral courage.

    That staff sergeant murdered sixteen Afghans. Our own leaders have murdered thousands and maimed tens of thousands of our own troops out of vanity, ambition and inertia. Who deserves our sympathy?

    In war, soldiers die. But they shouldn’t die for bullshit.”

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/03/21/us_troops_as_campaign_props.html