Showing posts with label 2012. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2012. Show all posts

20121111

2012 Presidential Election Demographic

This Washington Post article on the demographic of the 2012 presidential election is interesting.
Naturally some reservation on the data must be kept as the data is from exit polling and  that the 2012 presidential election turn out was about 9-10 millions less than that of 2008. Never the less this should give the Republican Party some cause for hope moving into the future when evaluating shifts toward the right since 2008.

The Trends
Males: +4% points gain
Females: +1%

Age 18-29: +5% (-6% for democrats)
Age 30-34: -1% (no change for democrats)
Age 45-64: +2% (-3% for democrats)
Age 65+: +3% (-1% for democrats)

White: +4%
Black: +2%
Hispanic:-4%
Asians: -9%
Other: +7% (-8% for democrats)

No high school education: (+1% for democrats)
High school graduate: +2% (-1% for democrats)
Some college / associate degree: +1% (-2% for democrats)
College graduate: +3%
Postgraduate study: +2% (-3% for democrats)

Income under $50k: no change
Income $50k - $99k: +5%
Income $100k or more: +5%

Married men: +7% (-8% for democrats)
Married women: +2% (-1% for democrats)
Unmarried men: +2%
Unmarried women:  +2% (-3% for democrats)

Ideology liberal: +1% (-3& for democrats)
Ideology moderate: +2% (-4% for democrats)
Ideology conservative: +4% (-3% for democrats)

Religion Protestant or other Christian: +3%
Religion Catholic: +3% (-4% for democrats)
Religion something else: +1% (+1% for democrats as well)
Religion Jewish: +9%
Religion none: +3% (-5% for democrats)

Republicans made gains in all these demographic groups except Hispanics and Asians. The Hispanic population, and to a lesser extent the Asian population, are both growing in significance in population and economic power. Hispanic constitute 16% of the population, with Asian as 5% and African-American as 13%. Clearly for the Republicans to gain in future election, outreach programs to the Hispanic and Asian population need to receive much greater emphasis.

Of the remaining demographic groups, assuming a polling margin of error of 3%, leaving gains of 4% or more as significant, the following groups moved toward the Republicans.
Males: +4% point gain
Age 18-29: +5% (-6% for democrats)
White: +4%
Income $50k - $99k: +5%
Income $100k or more: +5%
Married men: +7% (-8% for democrats)
Ideology conservative: +4% (-3% for democrats)
Religion Jewish: +9%
Why the Republicans are typically seen as a party of white conservative married men, I believe gains in the young voters, working people, and Jews need to be solidified. The majority of young voters and Jews still voted for democrats. Identify why these voters switch and build on these causes. Men and those with income greater than $50k only became more likely to vote Republican this election and these gains absolutely cannot be taken for granted.

On the cusps are the 3% gains.
Age 65+: +3% (-1% for democrats)
College graduate: +3%
Religion Protestant or other Christian: +3%
Religion Catholic: +3% (-4% for democrats)

In summary, the Republican needs to solidify the base (married men, white and conservatives), build on gains made with men, those making over $50k, the elderly, college graduates and Christians. Reach out much more to the young, Jews, Hispanics, and Asians. Build on your strengths and at the same time address your weakness.

Note I did not include independents, and those who are doing better/worse than four years ago as these are essentially referendum on the incumbent. Given the broad gains made by the Republicans, that Obama still won reinforces my hypothesis of the cult of Obama as the cause of his electoral victory rather than any fundamental shift in American ideology.

20121107

A thought on Obama's victory

In retrospect I think we all should have foreseen an Obama reelection. In 2008 Obama got elected not based on the Democratic platform, Obama got elected as a person. There was a cult of personality around Obama. Though diminished some, that cult of personality remains in 2012. Thus it did not matter that Obama lied about Benghazi or Romney. Thus it did not matter that the economy remains as bad today as it was when he took office. Thus it did not matter that he broke so many promises. To his followers he was their guy, and their vote was his. Loyal fans cheer for their team even in losing season.

The Democrats should not assume the turn out in 2008 and 2012 will be duplicated in 2016. It wasn't about the Democratic turnout, it was the Obama turnout.

20121027

Birth cover up

First thing first, I believe Obama, being a child of an American citizen, has a legitimate angle to be president of the US. Second thing, he already is president of the US. However, I find the following tibits from a circulating email interesting as they suggests a cover up of sort.

1.Back in 1961 people of color were called 'Negroes.' So how can the Obama 'birth certificate' state he is "African-American" when the term wasn't even used at that time?

2. The birth certificate that the White House released lists Obama's birth as August 4, 1961 & lists Barack Hussein Obama as his father. No big deal, right ? At the time of Obama's birth, it also shows that his father is aged 25 years old, and that Obama's father was born in " Kenya , East Africa ." This wouldn't seem like anything of concern, except for the fact that Kenya did not even exist until 1963, two whole years after Obama's birth, and 27 years after his father's birth. How could Obama's father have been born in a country that did not yet exist ? Up and until Kenya was formed in 1963, it was known as the "British East Africa Protectorate".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya

3. On the Birth Certificate released by the White House, the listed place of birth is "Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital." This cannot be, because the hospital(s) in question in 1961 were called KauiKeolani Children's Hospital" and "Kapi'olani Maternity Home," respectively. The name did not change to Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until 1978, when these two hospitals merged. How can this particular name of the hospital be on a birth certificate dated 1961 if this name had not yet been applied to it until 1978? http://http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-children/about-us/default.aspx
http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-children/about-us/default.aspx

Why hasn't this been discussed in the major media ?
4. Perhaps a clue comes from Obama’s book on his father. He states how proud he is of his father fighting in WW II. I'm not a math genius, so I may need some help from you. Barack Obama’s “birth certificate” says his father was 25 years old in 1961 when he was born. That should have put his father’s date of birth approximately 1936—if my math holds (Honest! I did that without a calculator!!!) Now we need a non-revised history book—one that hasn't been altered to satisfy the author’s goals—to verify that WW II was basically between 1939 and 1945. Just how many 3 year olds fight in wars? Even in the latest stages of WW II his father wouldn't have been more than 9. Does that mean that Mr. Obama is a liar, or simply chooses to alter the facts to satisfy his imagination or political purposes (still qualifies as a “liar”)?

20121004

$716,000,000,000.00

I watched the first presidential debate last night between President Obama and Governor Romney. No doubt whatsoever that Romney won by an impressive command of facts and figures.




I am once again excited about the chances of defeating Obama and steer this nation from a path of self destruction. The wallet will once again open to the cause.

$716,000,000,000.00  is the amount that Romney repeatedly hammered Obama with. The figure is the amount Obama is cutting from medicare.

20111219

Run Sarah Run!

Open Letter of Reconsideration to Governor Palin

After Palin, who i will support with sweat and money, comes
Anyone but Obama, who i will support with a vote.

20110614

The GOP Field 2011

I watched most of the GOP New Hampshire debate last night. There simply not enough contrast and fighting; everyone was too jovial and collegial with each other. They seem all old boys GOP network: Cain wanting in, and so did Bachmann. That resulted in the front runner remaining the front runner: Romney. I am not a fan.
I think Sarah Palin should declare and run. She would be a clear contrast to both the current GOP field, as well as with Obama. Regarding her electibility, let the primary decided de facto rather than pundits declaring her unelectable a priori and there for should not run. Regarding electibility, consider this:

Palin Ties Obama in Key Swing States: OH, NC, NV, MO, PA