Turnout in 2012

[Reaganfan]

I have a feeling that the Tea Party and conservatives will come out in unprecedented droves next year, while the majesty of 2008 will have long since disappeared for Barack Obama.

Keep in mind, much of the youth turnout will likely be suppressed due to what I expect to be a disinterest in 2012 as opposed to 2008.

Obama voters:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMK0rEfkFXI

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Higher for Republicans, lower for Democrats. Overall, lower then 2008.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Higher for Republicans, lower for Democrats. Overall, lower then 2008.

Because of the stellar field of pub candidates, or hate of Obama, or both, or something else?  I think it's going to be lower across the board.

[Likely Voter]

Turnout depends on the GOP nominee. I agree that the dem base are likely to be less motivated, but if the nominee is Perry they will turnout because he is scarier than Bush to them. I think GOP turnout will be low if Romney is nominee. The base comprimised last time with McCain and got nothing in return. Plus there are republicans that wont vote for a Mormon.

So with Perry it will be a high turnout election overall, and if Romney a low turnout.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Higher for Republicans, lower for Democrats. Overall, lower then 2008.

Because of the stellar field of pub candidates, or hate of Obama, or both, or something else?  I think it's going to be lower across the board.

Across the board, yes it is going to be lower, but more Republicans will turn out then Democrats, because of a strong hate of Obama, plus the fact that re-elections are not as "intense" as an election with nobody seeking reelection. A Romney/West, Romney/Rubio, or Romney/Martinez ticket might bring out more then a Perry/Corker, or Perry/Bachmann ticket.

[Paul Kemp]

Obama voters:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMK0rEfkFXI

Dumbs are bipartisan.

[DrScholl]

The GOP turns out the same most of the time, it all depends on how high Democratic turnout is. I don't think GOP turnout has much higher to go, since they already vote in droves.

[J. J.]

Higher for Republicans, lower for Democrats. Overall, lower then 2008.

Because of the stellar field of pub candidates, or hate of Obama, or both, or something else?  I think it's going to be lower across the board.

Across the board, yes it is going to be lower, but more Republicans will turn out then Democrats, because of a strong hate of Obama, plus the fact that re-elections are not as "intense" as an election with nobody seeking reelection. A Romney/West, Romney/Rubio, or Romney/Martinez ticket might bring out more then a Perry/Corker, or Perry/Bachmann ticket.

A Romney/Martinez ticket would violate the Constitution.

It will be hate of the incumbent.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Reganfan,

I agree with the general thrust of you post.  Here is a comparison of actual and projected (2012) composition of actual voters by partisan identification.

Party                  2004     2006     2008     2010     2012   Difference 2008/2010

Democrat            37 %    38 %     39 %    35 %     37 %               - 2
Republican          37        36         32         35         35                      3
Other                     *          *           *           1           *
Independent        26        26         29         29         28                    - 1
Total                  100      100      100        100       100

2008 saw a turnout among Democrats slightly higher than is typical, and a Republican turnout that was much lower than typical.

Relative to registration       2004     2006     2008     2010     

Democrat                             0.88      0.91      0.89      0.86
Republican                          1.14      1.11      1.04      1.15

Now, essentially what happened is that the Obama campaign was slightly more adept at voter turnout than the Kerry campaign, while McCain alienated the Republican base with his support for amnesty for illegal aliens and bailouts for the banks, such that turnout among Republicans was substantially depressed.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Higher for Republicans, lower for Democrats. Overall, lower then 2008.

Because of the stellar field of pub candidates, or hate of Obama, or both, or something else?  I think it's going to be lower across the board.

Across the board, yes it is going to be lower, but more Republicans will turn out then Democrats, because of a strong hate of Obama, plus the fact that re-elections are not as "intense" as an election with nobody seeking reelection. A Romney/West, Romney/Rubio, or Romney/Martinez ticket might bring out more then a Perry/Corker, or Perry/Bachmann ticket.

A Romney/Martinez ticket would violate the Constitution.

It will be hate of the incumbent.

How would it violate the constitution. Martinez is above 35 and from NM....

[Mr. Taft Republican]

Higher for white evangelicals, lower for blacks, overall lower. Whites will be out in earnest, but it depends how much based on the nominee for Reps, it'll be higher for Bachmann or Perry than Romney, and if RON PAUL!!!!! gets the nominee I can see a massive exodus of Republican establishment faithful.

[Disarray]

I think you guys are heavily underestimating the Democratic Party's ability to scare their voters to the polls.

"They want to gut you Medicare to give millionaires more massive tax cuts!"

Perhaps that won't GOTV quite as well as "Hope" but it sure as hell will get it out.

I'd also add Obama did far better than Kerry did across all age groups except seniors! He actually did worse, I'm not saying this year Obama is going to take us back to 2000 when the Democrats won seniors (the deaths of the new deal seniors makes this unlikely) but me thinks he will do better than he did in 08 vs someone who sees social security as vault from which they can dish out more tax breaks to the wealthy.

[The_Texas_Libertarian]

No one thinks that a conservative nominee will motivate the Democratic base to vote? Hah!  Also remember that every 2 years that go by states continue to have minority population growth, primarily the Hispanic population in the southwest.  So even if turn out is slightly lower, the overall numbers could be so high that it replicates 2008.  Of course this depends on how the GOP acts the following months.

[Simfan34]

Higher for Republicans, lower for Democrats. Overall, lower then 2008.

Because of the stellar field of pub candidates, or hate of Obama, or both, or something else?  I think it's going to be lower across the board.

Across the board, yes it is going to be lower, but more Republicans will turn out then Democrats, because of a strong hate of Obama, plus the fact that re-elections are not as "intense" as an election with nobody seeking reelection. A Romney/West, Romney/Rubio, or Romney/Martinez ticket might bring out more then a Perry/Corker, or Perry/Bachmann ticket.

A Romney/Martinez ticket would violate the Constitution.

It will be hate of the incumbent.

How would it violate the constitution. Martinez is above 35 and from NM....

I presume he thought you meant Mel...

[milhouse24]

The Turnout will be a major aspect of determining who wins.  Despite having all the money and a mediocre scandal-free term, Obama will likely lose based on low turnout of his base of young people, blacks, white catholics, swing voter indepedents because of economic issues, and no "anti-war" issue.

Now the problem for Romney or Perry will be increasing turnout especially to get the swing voters.  Romney may face enthusiasm issues from Southern evangelicals, but that can be mitigated by having a southern evangelical candidate, like Perry, DeMint, or Jeb.  I don't think Perry would accept the VP from Romney, he's too content as the governor of Texas.  Jeb wants to be in the White House one way or another.  Romney can get the swing voters excited. 

The problem for Perry will be getting the swing voters excited.  He can certainly bring out the Southern Evangelicals, and Dubya brought them out to win close elections.  But I think if the issue is on Jobs and not "compassionate christianity" then Perry's appeal is limited.  Some swing voters may be tired of having Texans on the top of the ticket.  Perry would do well if he had Daniels as his VP. 

[Minnesota Mike]

No one thinks that a conservative nominee will motivate the Democratic base to vote? Hah!  Also remember that every 2 years that go by states continue to have minority population growth, primarily the Hispanic population in the southwest.  So even if turn out is slightly lower, the overall numbers could be so high that it replicates 2008.  Of course this depends on how the GOP acts the following months.

Exactly. The voting eligible minority population is growing so much faster than the voting eligible white population that it is almost a given that minorities will make up a greater percentage of the 2012 electorate than of the 2008 electorate.   

[Meeker]

Nearly everyone in the Tea Party was already voting before 2009. They just started calling themselves something different two years ago.

I think turnout will be a little lower overall and a little more Republican than 2008.

[Averroës Nix]

Tea Party voters tend to be white, old, and middle class. So yeah, turnout might be a little higher among Republicans, but this is a demographic that already has a really high participation rate.

Turnout will certainly be lower among the groups that made up Obama's coalition in 2008. There's no way he'll be able to whip up the same kind of positive support as before, and I doubt that he can make up for it with attacks on the GOP candidate. After all, Sarah Palin was on the ballot in 2008.

Watch for support for Democrats - and voting rates - to be lower in particular among white young people of all incomes and educational backgrounds.

[pbrower2a]

The Hard Right will go out to vote, driven by a fear of an America going into a direction that it dreads. Gay marriage. Non-whites joining the middle class instead of "knowing their (subordinate and deprived) places". Abortion. Evolution. No school prayer. Black helicopters.  The Feds taking away all firearms. And, unspoken, a black man as President of the United States, the ultimate slap on white supremacy. Much of it is subconscious, but it works on gullible, scared people who fall for reactionary and even fascist causes.

But will the rest of us? In 2010 the Obama coalition got complacent and ignored that Congress matters as much as does the President in passing legislation. Americans have gotten a hard civics lesson that they won't forget. What has the Hard Right done for anyone not a big financial backer? Its political fronts are unpopular -- especially the Tea Party which seems to have taken over the Republican Party.

Liberals and progressives know that to save their political skins they must organize in 2012 and must get a coherent message out. They are taking nothing for granted this time. They know what a Hard Right America will be -- either a fascist nightmare or a federation of Tara-like plantations with high technology. In 2010 I noticed that the liberals and progressives were badly unorganized. Such will not likely be so in 2012.

In 2008 Barack Obama had a superb GOTV campaign that Democratic politicians latched onto and won with. In 2010 there was no such campaign. In 2012 it will be back. The President will need it.

 

[Penelope]

It will be lower across the board.

[Politico]

Liberals and progressives know that to save their political skins they must organize in 2012 and must get a coherent message out. They are taking nothing for granted this time. They know what a Hard Right America will be -- either a fascist nightmare or a federation of Tara-like plantations with high technology.

This is such BS. The nation is not nearly as right-wing as it was in the 1980s and 1990s. Those were great decades, especially the latter half of each decade. I'll take that any day over Obama's days of malaise. Bill Clinton could never win the support of liberals and progressives in this climate. And he was a great president. The problem is not the right, although some of them are a bit loopy on some social issues, but the left. They have this fantasy belief that government is some panacea that is the solution to any and every economic problem. I am scared where this fantasy will lead if it continues as is or, worse, is fully implemented to the greatest degree possible.

And this is coming from a former Gore and Kerry supporter (And a moderate Obama supporter in 2008).

[Averroës Nix]

Liberals and progressives know that to save their political skins they must organize in 2012 and must get a coherent message out. They are taking nothing for granted this time. They know what a Hard Right America will be -- either a fascist nightmare or a federation of Tara-like plantations with high technology.

This is such BS. The nation is not nearly as right-wing as it was in the 1980s and 1990s. Those were great decades, especially the latter half of each decade. I'll take that any day over Obama's days of malaise. Bill Clinton could never win the support of liberals and progressives in this climate. And he was a great president. The problem is not the right, although some of them are a bit loopy on some social issues, but the left. They have this fantasy belief that government is some panacea that is the solution to any and every economic problem. I am scared where this fantasy will lead if it continues as is or, worse, is fully implemented to the greatest degree possible.

And this is coming from a former Gore and Kerry supporter (And a moderate Obama supporter in 2008).

pbrower2a, organization and (especially) messaging only matter on the margins. Can you think of one election in American history in which messaging would have changed the winner of the popular vote when the popular vote was won by a margin of more than 5%? I don't mean to discount your point entirely, but with regard to turnout I think that people's perceptions of the country's economy are going to be much more important than Obama's skill at campaigning or fundraising.

Politico, would your opinion of the Democrats & Obama improve if the economy were to recover within the next year, however unlikely that may seem? Or are your convictions about the dangers of Big Government strong enough that a recovery wouldn't convince you to change your mind?

[The_Texas_Libertarian]

This is such BS. The nation is not nearly as right-wing as it was in the 1980s and 1990s. Those were great decades, especially the latter half of each decade. I'll take that any day over Obama's days of malaise. Bill Clinton could never win the support of liberals and progressives in this climate. And he was a great president. The problem is not the right, although some of them are a bit loopy on some social issues, but the left. They have this fantasy belief that government is some panacea that is the solution to any and every economic problem. I am scared where this fantasy will lead if it continues as is or, worse, is fully implemented to the greatest degree possible.

And this is coming from a former Gore and Kerry supporter (And a moderate Obama supporter in 2008).

You are right, our country is no where near as conservative as the 1980s.  That is why it is interesting to see the Republican party move further to the right.  Reagan wouldn't even stand a chance with the modern day conservative GOP base.  He would be labeled as a left wing liberal for having the audacity to slightly raise taxes.   He would be labeled a debt lover because of the increased national debt during the Reagan administration.  He would be labeled as an anti-Business politician because he lacked the utter hatred for unions the way the modern GOP base does.  The conservatives have this fantasy that the invisible hand of the market will magically fix everything.  That's why Texas has more than 27% of it's residents lacking health care insurance whereas Massachusetts has around 5% lacking health care insurance under the guise of a big government plan.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

It depends.
/thread

[Politico]

Politico, would your opinion of the Democrats & Obama improve if the economy were to recover within the next year, however unlikely that may seem?

It's just not going to happen. Unemployment will definitely be above 8% at the end of 2012. Not a single economist in the world is forecasting otherwise. The Stimulus Package did not work. Maybe things could have turned out differently if the package had been spent in other, more appropriate ways, but I refuse to support the re-election of an administration that managed to almost double the national debt without subsequent growth in the economy on par with even average historical levels. It is just incredible. One cannot even begin to imagine the type of hidden waste and boondoggles that must have taken place for this to be the end result.