Thursday, December 19, 2013

Black And Hispanic Vote Is Not Why Romney Lost.This Is Why And How 2016 Can Be Won

With a movie coming out focusing on Mitt Romney and his 2012 presidential run (which is garnering some crocodile tear sympathy from those who attacked him from the left) it is instructive to look at why he lost as the GOP looks towards 2016. I wrote earlier that Romney was, in point of fact, beaten before he started, this article will expand on that

Post election analysis by the likes of the highly respected Sean Trende showed that Romney lost Florida because although Black turnout for President Obama dipped fractionally,  that was compensated for by  a slightly higher move from the GOP to Obama by Cuban Americans which gave the state to the Dem's by a minuscule 0.9%. 

The Black turnout in Virginia held at 2008 levels, and that, plus the migration from D.C. into northern Virginia gave Obama a more comfortable 3.9% win. The swing state of Ohio, without which no Republican has won the presidency saw, to the amazement of the Romney strategists (and famously Karl Rove who on election night had a hissy fit about it) an increase of Black turnout from stratospheric heights to, the puzzlement of the observers mentioned, unbelievable heights. The end result being a win for Obama by 3%

With these key states it would appear that the factors the analysts focused on massive Black and Hispanic turnout for the Dem's were apparently what gave President Obama his second term. But that is not the case as a simple check of the Electoral College map results below show. Even if Romney had won Florida, Virginia.and Ohio he would have gained 60 further Electoral College votes-still  4short, at the revised total of 266.

Since Indiana and North Carolina had returned to their traditional Republican column where would the 4 (or 3 if the election were tied and thrown into the House) have come from? Obama's margins in New England, the industrial states the traditionally liberal upper mid-west and most especially the far west, were such that political reality clearly shows Romney had no chance of picking off any of them. 

Neither are they needed for a Republican to win in 2016 as G.W. Bush showed in 2004. The states that  re-elected Bush in 2004 were (as well of course as Florida/Virgina/Ohio) Iowa-Colorado-New Mexico-Nevada.

These were lost by Romney by significant margins. Iowa by 5.8% Colorado 5.4% New Mexico by a massive 10.2% and Nevada 6.7%. With the right team, and especially if the mood is for change in 2016. the relatively small Democrat margins in the Eastern States can be overcome. 

It might be expected that Black turnout might drop just the small amounted needed to assist the GOP's campaign and the new, high profile Hispanic American team that the GOP has could further assist-especially if one were on the ticket. Then only one of the "Bush states" would be required.

It can reasonably be stated that Iowa did not go for Obama because of the Black or Hispanic vote there. Another factor must have come into play as the state was not in Romney's column for any length of time throughout the polling period. 

Perhaps Romney's Mormonism was a major factor in this state with a significant Evangelical population and, if the 2016 candidate is a conservative mainstream Christian that, plus the normal swing of the electoral pendulum night be enough. This quote confirms that Black/Hispanic vote played little part in the substantial Obama win in Iowa;

"In Iowa, figures weren't available for turnout among racial and ethnic groups because of their relatively small share of the state’s population.. - See more at:

Colorado is also fertile ground. This year three state legislators were either recalled or resigned because of their perceived gun control support and again, the right candidate could bring this state back to the GOP fold with a strong emphasis on the 2nd amendment rights in this hunting loving state.

The doomsayers and "weight of demographics" propagandists on the left may be fighting the last two elections in 2016. The hysterics over the Black vote can be seen to be unwarranted if the right candidate is nominated who can appeal to Hispanics, hunters in Colorado and Evangelicals in Iowa. In point of fact if any three of south-West states can be won the GOP can win without Virginia. Of course any increase in Black support for the GOP is to be welcomed, but it is not crucial, and if it comes over time through economic growth in the Black community that may be the best approach for Republican strategists to take.

The choice of the team in 2016 is hugely important. If the GOP establishment forces another in the line of Dole/McCain/Romney on the rank and file, and the conservatives stay home again, then an outstanding opportunity will have been thrown away-lets hope common sense rules and the idiocy of not having Governor Palin address the 2012 convention is not repeated.

No comments :