Jan 09 2008

GOP Losing Independents – Do Insults Help?

Published by at 9:24 am under 2008 Elections,All General Discussions

While the “RINO” McCain won New Hampshire with a burst of conservative independents (like myself), the overall numbers of which way the non-aligned middle of America will trend shows the same thing as Iowa – GOP Losing big time. I can’t find numbers yet but Harold Huchison seems to have found some and they aren’t pretty: 59-41 Dems.

I had to laugh at Mark Levin last night. Like most conservative talk radio it is best to do as they say and not as they do. Before going into his obligatory diatribes against McCain and Bush and all the other traitors who sold the country out on comprehensive immigration reform he discussed the Democrats. One of his “words of wisdom” to Hillary was to not “brow-beat people into voting for her”. Yeah, look how good it is working for the GOP. The “more conservative” candidates are sinking. And the independents have said enough with the foul-mouthed insults from the far right. They are taking their support to the Dems. And what do the talking hot-heads do? Continue to call for purity and calling those who disagree names. Quislings and RINOs can easily fix their labeling problem, the simply become democrat voters.

9 responses so far

9 Responses to “GOP Losing Independents – Do Insults Help?”

  1. I can’t find where I saw those numbers, AJ…

  2. Okay, AJ: I found CNN’s exit polling data for the Democratic and Republican primaries. The Democratic primary electorate had about 44% of independents. The GOP electorate came in with 34% independents.

    Look at the total turnout. 279,276 people voted in the Dem primary. 228,531 voted in the GOP primary. That means about 122,760 Independents voted for one of the Dems compared to 77,690 who voted for one of the Republicans. That’s a 61.2 to 38.8 blowout.

    My initial read was optimistic.

    My blog has this update as well. The GOP has a problem. These results look a lot like the 2006 blowout.

  3. AJStrata says:

    Thanks Harold, I was going to do the math but you saved me the trouble. Yes, numbers like that mean a GOP blood bath in November – across the board. Don’t forget the coattails effect.

    Like I said – do all the insults thrown at moderates help?

    Cheers, AJStrata

  4. SallyVee says:

    Quote from Michael Medved re: Indys:

    [SNIP] According to exit polls, McCain slaughtered Romney among the self-described independents (who were an unexpectedly high 37% of total GOP voters) by a margin of 40% to 27% (Ron Paul got 13%). Among self-described Republicans, the Mittster came much closer to the Mac (33% to 35%) but McCain still won.

    […] As he did last week, Romney displayed special weakness among three key groups in the electorate among which McCain– just like Huckabee in Iowa– beat the Mitt-man soundly. Romney performed disproportionately poorly among women (they just don’t like him, well-tailored good looks and all), voters below 30, and voters who earn below $50,000 a year.

    Unless team Romney somehow manages to attract female, younger and working-class voters, he’ll continue to lose – just as surely as he’d get creamed in the general election.

    […] And as to those who want to discount McCain’s victory because it was based on the support of independents, isn’t it blindingly obvious that no Republican can even come close to winning the White House without drawing similar support from independents in November? It’s difficult to discount the proposition that the guy who attracts independents in January will likely stand the best chance of getting their backing again some ten months later.

    New Hampshire Polling: What Went Wrong?

  5. MerlinOS2 says:

    OK by the numbers

    NH turnout figures, 2000 vs. 2008

    DEM 2000
    about 150,000
    DEM 2008
    about 280,000

    GOP 2000
    about 235,000
    GOP 2008
    about 230,000

    NH is a heavy Blue state. I was Blue , is Blue and will be Blue.
    Why are you so shocked?
    Republican support was stable over the time frame and even growth would not have made a difference in the out come.
    Dems were energized for the cat fight between Obama and Hill and others wanted Edwards.
    The state is Blue and not representative of the country balance as a whole.
    Some seem to think that we should all of a sudden have a parity race in California I guess.

  6. AJStrata says:


    Up until 2006 NH was RED. It went Blue for the first time in a century in the state legislature in 2006. It is an indicator just like once Red VA is.

    And your numbers PROVE our point.

    Percent increase in turnout for the Dem over 8 years = 86%

    The GOP LOST voters!

    Where did you get your figures, I could use the link for a new post.

  7. lurker9876 says:

    NH was far left moderate RED with Lincoln Chafee. Kinda camouflaged BLUE in reality. NH seems to gear more towards ideology of socialism even when in RED. What matters the most is who they vote, regardless of color.

    I am not yet concerned about this as a trend for the entire country. A few more states…then I will agree that this would be a trend. However, I did read that the number of voter registrations as Republican is just starting to go up in the last few weeks so that may signify something different that what some of us think the trend is today.

  8. The Macker says:

    “Independents” are not monolithic. Many are just unidentified Dems or Repubs. A fraction (possibly 20%) swing either way. That’s why holding the “base” is so important. And I think immigration was the wrong issue to do it on.

  9. Terrye says:

    I hope that this election in NH puts an end to the idea that sounding like Tancredo and Malkin on immigration is a winner. How many times does this tactic have to blow up in peoples’ faces before they realize it is a loser?