Reply With Quote
So the GOP gains are just temporary nothing the Dems should worry about?
For simplicities sake I'm just going to draw off of the numbers that CNN has up because they are by far the most comprehensive list that I have been able to locate. Now, if anyone knows of more comprehensive poll data then by all means please share it with me because I'd like to see it.
Vote by Sex
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
Male (47%)
42%
56%
2%
Female (53%)
48%
49%
3%
Nothing really too noteworthy here. The percentages of the sexes were the same as in 2008 and the GOP made gains across both sexes. Men were more likey to vote for the GOP and the same held through in 2010
Vote by Race
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
White (78%)
37%
60%
3%
African-American (10%)
90%
9%
1%
Latino (8%)
64%
34%
2%
Asian (1%)
56%
40%
4%
Other (2%)
53%
43%
4%
The results here were very close to what they were in 2008. The GOP wins among white people and loses with everyone else quite handily.
Vote by Age
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
18-29 (11%)
57%
40%
3%
30-44 (23%)
47%
50%
3%
45-64 (44%)
45%
53%
2%
65 and Older (23%)
38%
59%
3%
The vote by age isn't necessarily surprising but this is the type of information that makes you feel as though the GOP's gains are not as strong as is seen at first glance.
The GOP wins every bracket here with the exception of those under 30, which the Dems win handily. 30-44 is a statistical tie for all intents and purposes so the GOP's bread and butter is those voters that are 45 and older. In 2008, voters 44 and under made up nearly half of the voters. In 2010, they were barely able to muster the 34% mark. All and all this is not a shock but a clear indicator that the much talked about enthusiasm gap was a big player and that many of the voters that put Obama in office didn't vote for the GOP but just didn't show up.
So the GOP gains are just temporary nothing the Dems should worry about?
Vote by Income
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
Under $30,000 (18%)
56%
41%
3%
$30-50,000 (19%)
51%
46%
3%
$50-75,000 (22%)
46%
52%
2%
$75-100,000 (15%)
42%
56%
2%
$100-200,000 (19%)
42%
56%
2%
$200,000 or More (7%)
35%
62%
3%
Vote by income isn't necessarily surprising: The richer you are the more likely you are to support the GOP. I'm not sure what percentage of Americans is in a household with $100,000 of income of more, but I am very sure that it is far less than 26%. What that shows you is how overrepresented that voting bloc is.
Vote by Ideology
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
Liberal (20%)
90%
8%
2%
Moderate (39%)
55%
42%
3%
Conservative (41%)
14%
84%
2%
There were notable changes here from 2008 but not so much in who people chose but in the numbers they showed up in (or what they identified as). In 2008 moderates made up 44 percent of the vote and liberals 22. Moderates in this election made up 39% and liberals 20%. Of course, this means that conservative identification shot up from 34% to 41%. Democrats still won over moderates but the fact is that conservatives simply outnumbered them this time.
Vote for President in 2008
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
Obama (45%)
84%
13%
3%
McCain (45%)
7%
91%
2%
Other (3%)
33%
56%
11%
Did not vote (4%)
38%
60%
2%
Enthusiasm gap! If you look at the total percentages, equal amounts of people who voted for McCain and Obama showed up. Now, if you can remember the actual election in 2008 Obama and McCain did not tie. Obama voters stayed home.
Your House Vote Meant To Express...
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
Support for Obama (24%)
95%
3%
2%
Opposition to Obama (37%)
5%
93%
2%
Obama Not a Factor (37%)
53%
43%
4%
I found these numbers to be really interesting. In voters for whom Obama wasn't a factor, the Democrats won by and won by a sizable margin. However, there were far more voter who showed up who were opposed to Obama than those who supported him. Obama was a big motivator for the GOP but most of us probably didn't need an exit poll to tell us that.
Opinion of Government
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
Government Should Do More (38%)
78%
20%
2%
Government Doing Too Much (56%)
20%
77%
3%
These numbers here show that the majority in the voters in who showed up feel that government is doing too much. However, I don't think the actual divide is as great. As I've pointed out in the numbers above, the fact is that this election has conservatives represented more than others, so their opinions will be over sampled. I think its much closer to 50/50.
That being said if conservatives continue to show up in larger numbers then this breakdown is the only one that matters.
Most Important Issue Facing Country Today
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
War in Afghanistan (8%)
56%
42%
2%
Health Care (18%)
52%
46%
2%
Economy (62%)
44%
54%
2%
Illegal Immigration (8%)
26%
69%
5%
63% voted because the economy was the greatest issue. Its the economy stupid, blah blah blah. Bad economy generally equals bad in bency and this is a long standing political rule.
Highest Priority for Next Congress
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
Cutting Taxes (19%)
26%
72%
2%
Reducing Deficit (39%)
33%
64%
3%
Spending to Create Jobs (37%)
68%
30%
2%
I really don't know what to take from these numbers but I figured I should include them.
Stimulus Package Has...
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
Helped Economy (32%)
85%
13%
2%
Hurt Economy (33%)
12%
86%
2%
Made No Difference (32%)
39%
58%
3%
The misinformation that the stimulus package hurt America may have been the single biggest issue that swung this election to the GOP. There is absolutely no way to say the stimulus bill made no difference yet a third of respondents answered that way and voted primarily for the GOP.
Who Do You Blame for Economic Problems?
Total
Democrat Republican Other/No Answer
Wall Street (35%)
42%
56%
2%
George W. Bush (29%)
85%
14%
1%
Barack Obama (23%)
7%
91%
2%
I found it really interesting that those who blamed Wall Street still voted primarily for the GOP. Otherwise the rest is unexpected. LOL @ blaming Obama though.
I basically think it all boils down to the GOP being more motivated. In 2008, the Democrats were able to use Bush to their advantage in terms of motivation. This time around, the GOP used Obama much to the same effect. Obviously writing off the GOP in 2008 was a mistake but not as much as some would think. The demographics of the future still point to a weaker GOP and it remains to be seen if they will be motivated in 2010. As this election has shown, the enthusiasm gap can play an incredible role and shift immensely in a short period of time.
If thats what you want to take for it then go ahead. I'm pretty sure I neither said nor implied any such thing.
Oh yeah, 2010 exit polls:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2010/results/polls/#USH00p1
2008
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls.main/
Essentially, it was was older white voters that came to the polls. Not exactly the demographic of the future.
Republic party still has that slow demographic shift to deal with.
Crazy old white people are deciding the future for the young multi-ethnic generation. Our young people need to vote, doesn't matter for who or what, but we can't let the crazy old white people control everything because they're scared of all the time.
LOL
You are a racist. I had my suspisions. I don't read much of your stuff so if you were this blunt in the past, well sorry for bringing it up now.
I'm generally curious, why do you hate white people so much? Did you vote for Barry because he is black?
lol
I'm generally curious, are you jealous of other racists? Did you vote for McCain because he isn't black?
Actually, there is. The economy was showing solid improvement signs before the stimulus passed, and then suffered another mini-crash afterwards, followed by slow gains. It's easily possible we could be at a similar or better position without the stimulus (without the added national debt).
If I hand you a 100 dollars and you deposit it into your bank account at the same time a 100 dollar check clears the balance stays the same. That being said, I still gave you 100 dollars and it made a difference.
It is IMPOSSIBLE that injecting that money into the economy had no effect.
@ these two posts.
Yeah, the Arizona law is all about creating a prison labor camp for illegal women and children.
Your new nickname will now be:
Smiley-Boy
or, alternately:
LMAO-Boy
(by the by, I stopped after looking through the first 3 pages of 15 of your posts, that provided more than enough material)
Troof. However, it's who is benefiting from the effect that is the ultimate success metric. At that point, the first round of QE rates a fairly solid "meh" IMO.
Except government intervention is not a straight +/- formula. Government intervention affects investing, inflation, debt sales, consumer confidence, etc.
Adding to the government deficit has a draining effect on the economy. So yes, putting money into the economy has an effect. It also had an effect on many other things which had a negative effect on the economy.
There's a reason it's rare for socialist/communist countries to outgrow a solid capitalism, economically.
That's the problem I've come across with a lot of Democrats. They don't understand that government spending isn't a straight +/-. They think the more government spends, the better, so they throw money at every problem. And then can't figure out why the effects aren't what they predicted.
The only thing I see here are democrats thinking "the stimulus came from Obama, therefore it must be good"; republicans thinking "the stimulus came from Obama, therefore it must be bad"; and a group in the middle who didn't see the stimulus result in a drop in the unemployment rate and held the party in power accountable for it.
Sure, something happened, but when it ended we were right where we started, at least in the perception of a great number of people. I doubt the people who answered that the stimulus had no effect were interested in making the distinction between walking in a circle versus never having moved in the first place.
Last edited by coyotes_geek; 11-09-2010 at 10:55 AM.
They should be interested. If the difference is moving backward or staying in place then thats not exactly going in a circle or standing still.
At this point it is fairly undeniable that the stimulus accomplished what it was supposed to. Private firm after private firm have confirmed this along with the CBO. If you want to talk about the long term cost then that is fine but the effect it had on the economy is undeniable.
Enlighten us, jack. Show that you know how to do more than make snide remarks and post gifs.
I'm not racist, I love crackers. It's just the old, scared, cowardly crackers that I don't like...and the only reason I single them out is because they are the loudest of the old, scared, cowardly people.
I voted for Biden, not Barry.
Elaborate.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
