Thursday, May 08, 2008

Some (Not So) Random Thoughts About the Democratic Primaries


Picking up on an idea I talked about earlier, and even earlier still, I wanted to point out some trends in voting patterns this year that have not been apparent in the recent past. And they have been barely apparent this year, if the mainstream media (what Howie calls the "liberal media") are your guide.

In Indiana this week 1,254,136 Democratic votes were cast. 409,816 Republican votes were cast. That’s about a 3-to-1 margin.

10% of Indiana GOP voters voted for Mike Huckabee. 8% voted for Ron Paul. 5% voted for Mitt Romney, a man who dropped out of the race two months ago.

What was supposed to be a decisive win for Hillary Clinton was in fact a horse race. About 23,000 votes out of 1.2 million separated them.

In North Carolina 1,571,337 Democratic votes were cast. 504,636 votes were cast for all GOP candidates. That’s a margin of more than 3-to-1.

12% of NC voters chose Mike Huckabee. 7% voted for Ron Paul. 4% voted for “none of the above.”

Obama won NC by a margin of about 230,000 votes.

Democrats won more votes than Republicans in North Carolina in 2000. But eight years ago, the margin was much closer. Democrats won 544,922 votes, and Republicans won 322,517. This year it was 1,571,337 Democratic votes to 504,636 GOP votes. Republicans improved their totals over 2000 by about 70%. Democrats improved their totals by about 250%.

In Indiana eight years ago, only 293,172 Democratic votes were cast, against 406,664 for the GOP candidates. This year it was 1,254,136 votes cast for Democrats and 409,816 for GOP candidates. The GOP raw vote total stayed essentially the same. The Democratic increase was more than 300%.

Democrats have been outvoting Republicans two-to-one consistently this entire primary season -- sometimes the margin has been three-to-one. This is a bad sign for the GOP over-all, and a bad sign for John McCain specifically. Here's more to consider:

A recent CBS News/New York Times Poll (April 25-29, 2008) asked Americans "Regardless of how you intend to vote, what would you prefer the next president do about the war in Iraq? Would you prefer the next president try to end the Iraq war within the next year or two, no matter what, or continue to fight the Iraq war as long as they felt it was necessary?" 62% said end it immediately; 34% said to continue it as long as necessary. They asked "Which is more important to you in a presidential candidate: someone who commits to staying in Iraq until the U.S. succeeds, or someone who is flexible about when to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq?" Only 19% said wait for success; 77% said "be flexible." This does not bode well for John McCain.

Howie, it is time to read the Book of Daniel, Chapter 5, Verse 7.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hey! Thanks for all the great info. I was browsing through a bunch of political websites and blogs (mostly liberal ones) and I came across your blog and find it to be very interesting. There are a bunch of others I like too, like huff post, and other news sites like politico. Do you know of any that cover politics and the environment? I saw earthlab.com which has mostly environmental info but some politics. I took EarthLab.com’s carbon calculator (http://www.earthlab.com/signupprofile/). I was pretty easy to use (and it doesn’t make me feel guilty after I take it). Are there any other blogs you would recommend? Can you drop me a link to your favorites or any ones with green info?

Narcissus said...

No matter what people say in polls, in the end McCain will win the 2008 presidential election for three reasons:

1) An African-American will never be elected in the U.S. at this time. There is still far too much racial prejudice in the U.S. for that ever to happen.

2) In times of crisis, people want a reassuring father-figure to lead them, not some wishy-washy, indecisive liberal like Obama.

3) Hillary has mortally wounded Obama with her vicious comments in recent months and has poisoned her base (old, white, ignorant hicks, Floridian Jews, and menopausal women). No matter what anyone says, he cannot win in the general election without the support of these groups.

Leave it to the Democrats once again to ruin a sure thing. They did it in 2000 and 2004, and they will inevitably do it again in 2008.