New Report Supports Republican Insider – (Sorta)

As part one of a two-part interview with R.I. now circulates among readers, I came across this just released article as I was searching for evidence to disprove R.I’s assertion that Mitt Romney’s loss was simply a case of bad messaging and lower voter turnout for conservatives.  While turnout did play a role, it now appears more likely it was the growth of Libertarian Party appeal that had a lot more to do with giving Barack Obama a second term as president.


EXCERPT:  (via National Review Online)


How Many 2008 McCain Voters Went Libertarian in 2012?

From 2008 to 2012, those voting for the Democrat ticket dropped from 69.49 million to 63.16 million, a drop of 6.3 million.

From 2008 to 2012, those voting for the Republican ticket dropped from 59.95 million to 59.47 million, a drop of just over 479,000.

From 2008 to 2012, those voting for the Libertarian ticket increased from 523,433  to 1.22 million, a jump of just over 700,000.

It’s their right; every vote has to be earned, and surely a Romney presidency would have offered its own disappointments to the Libertarian worldview. But it may be a continuing liability for the GOP that roughly one percent of the electorate believes strongly in limited government, but votes in a way that does not empower the GOP to do anything to limit that government.   LINK


So while overall voter turnout for Barack Obama declined by MILLIONS over the 2008 numbers (which is what all the internals were showing would happen according to WHI prior to the election)  the turnout for Mitt Romney was only slightly lower than what took place in 2008.  And yet, as I’ve said before, Barack Obama still managed to win.  When you have the number of people voting Libertarian increasing by over 700,000 votes since 2008 - that certainly put a significant dent in Mitt Romney’s chances to win this election.  Libertarians are not entirely to blame though.  I wish to be very clear with that.  There is still no real excuse that fewer Republicans voted in 2012 than 2008 given what was so clearly at stake.  The reasons for THAT remain…murky.  Some have suggested it was anti-Mormon sentiment.  Others suggest, as does Republican Insider, it was largely the fault of poor messaging on the part of the Romney campaign.  LINK  Certainly the mainstream media did its best to Republican voter turnout.

And perhaps, as many of you have declared – it was THEFT of the size and scope we have never before seen in an American election.


Cover for 'The Man Who Calls Himself Obama Volume III'

The Man Who Calls Himself Obama Volume III

513 days ago by in News | You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
About the

Be courteous to all, but intimate with few, and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence. -G. Washington

36 Comments to New Report Supports Republican Insider – (Sorta)
    • Essa
    • During the primary debates we conservatives were excited at the prospect of the Presidential candidates finally fighting for us by exposing what amounts to a coup of the constitution, the nationalization of several sectors of the economy via executive order, and the lawless venture capitalism through stealing taxpayer money from the treasury to pay off all the slimy hands that were held out awaiting payout for supporting the administration.

      What we received instead, was a Presidential candidate that was not chosen by voters which became transparently apparent after we all were made to suffer through the flavor of the week spook fest. Most of us also understand the fact, there is a next in line Presidential nominee lineup. Romney ran for President the last time, therefore he was chosen this time, and I repeat not by we the people as all the petty scandals now prove the nominees either took a dive and or were destroyed by lawyers. I say, please no more lawyers for President or congress for that matter.

      I respectfully say to RI do not blame the voter, it is the politicians game and the voters are the pawns. We voters don’t like the sugar coated niceties being said to the enemy, for it is time to get into the trenches and fight. It is all in the wording of the message, as the truth must be laid out in a very harsh manner, and we don’t want to hear representatives of the Republican Party say of the enemy, I am sure he is a nice person and a great family man stuff. We cringe when we hear pleasantries said about a man who is out halt all further industrialization of this country and redistribute wealth as an equalizer in order bring about poverty to all producers as punishment for success.

      Next time, if there is a next time, during the primary debates the candidates must turn against the enemy and go on an all out attack directed at the administration they are running against instead of devouring each other. We the people expect our candidates to fight for us via attacking those who are out to divide and conquer us, we who are your constituents.

      • readyornot
      • Essa, I agree with most of your comment.

        The primaries, as I saw them, were full of Republicans eating their own. I personally favor Rick Perry but many here in Texas don’t like him. Look people, there are no perfect candidates, get that notion out of your head and let’s move forward. (no pun intended)

        • RyanMN
        • Question for you, readyornot. I travel to Texas frequently for work and a colleague of mine down there (who is a card-carrying Republican) doesn’t care for Perry either. I haven’t asked why because I typically avoid delving into politics at work. You mentioned that many in Texas don’t like him.

          From the outside looking in, he’s a genuine conservative who actually walks the walk. He’s a bit socially conservative for my tastes but I wouldn’t imagine that’s what is turning off some of the conservative voter base.

          I’d be very interested in hearing your take on why a fair amount of Republicans down in Texas don’t like him.

    • readyornot
    • First, I don’t believe religion played a part this election cycle. There were so many angry voters over the economy, etc. that religion was one of the last items considered, if at all. Second, I tried continuously on other blogs to discourage those that continued to harp on a third party candidate indicating it would indeed give doo-dah another four years, but, to no avail.

      RI – get in touch with me. I have two fabulous college girls that would love to shake up Washington with their up to date messaging.

      • M. Simon
      • The TEA Party HAD the right idea. Sticking to fiscal issues only makes a bigger tent.

        God help me I voted for Obama over Keyes. Picking the Communist over the Theocon. Intentionally. There were a lot of R voters in Illinois who made the same decision.

        Now Romney wasn’t much of a Theocon (he tried) but the rest of the Party? Well even a lot of Republicans find the Party unattractive. And the TEAs? Mostly a socon movement these days. They started with a good idea and got co-opted by the base. And the base alone is no longer capable of winning elections. See the above link.

        I can understand why so many Republicans stayed home. See the above link.

        My advice:

        Stick. To. Fiscal. Issues. ONLY! It is a bigger tent.

        What do I keep hearing in these forums? “I’m RIGHT and I’m not going to change.”

        I have resigned myself to the communists. Sadly.

    • RyanMN
    • I’d put emphasis on the “sorta”, UM. The key quote from the article:
      “so the Libertarian vote did not make up the difference, just about a third of it.” Although either way, E.A.B.’s head will explode.

      I’m a libertarian Goldwater Republican. I’m not a capital “L” Libertarian so I can’t claim to know exactly what went through the minds of the people that did vote for Gary Johnson when you consider what was at stake in this election. If I had to guess, part of them are just hardcore, wacko Libertarians that don’t realize they’re really Anarcho-Capitalists. The other part are just people fed up with the Republicans promising to shrink government and never do. I empathize with the latter, although certainly not enough to have voted for anyone other than Romney a couple weeks ago.

      Regardless, the demographic speculation and the incessant talk of “What do the Republicans need to change in order to win a national election” is pointless. Within a day it was common knowledge among every one of my conacts within government that election fraud had delivered the win to Obama. It will be very difficult for the Republican Party to formulate a strategy for changing the party with unreliable data.

      I appreciate RI’s talk of Republicans becoming genuinely conservative again but the Tea Party is already doing that from the bottom up by weeding out the RINOs in the primaries. No, that won’t work with a Presidential election, but we’ll take care of the legislators and the governors.

      But it’s all for naught if there’s no integrity at the ballot box. The Republican party leadership should be spending every minute they have working to make the voting process legitimate again. Paper ballots, voter id and tighter protocols. Refute the cries of “Raaaaacist” with common sense.

      • M. Simon
      • Ryan,

        I had a “free” vote – I live in Illinois – and voted Libertarian to send that very message. Down ticket straight R.

        If it is not close they can’t cheat. Twenty million more R votes would have turned the tide. So why didn’t the Rs get them? I think the “prating about small government and never delivering” is a big part. And the various “Wars On…” Drugs, Abortion, etc. Solve your problems without government. It is how you get small government.

        Science fiction author Bill Quick has some thoughts about how the Libertarian vote affected down ticket races.

    • jane
    • The Republican establishment made a huge mistake by ticking off Ron Paul voters – but I still don’t think that’s what won Obama the election. It was the voter fraud. However…with Lame Cherry suggesting that some of that fraud was done by Karl Rove….I don’t think we can trust the new “Republican Insider.”

      Please, Ulstermann, find a RON PAUL INSIDER…that’s the new INSIDER we need to hear from.

      • E.A.B.
      • Actually, the GOP’s mistake with regard to Ron Paul was even allowing him to debate. He’s an albatross and a useful idiot for the socialists’ side.

        A “Ron Paul Insider” would basically be a willful saboteur against conservatism and liberty.

        • NameBM
        • I can confirm that my daughter’s boyfriend (Hollywood liberal, born and bread) was ready to vote Paul.

          His message of looking into the financial corruption of the Feds and off the establishment personality resonates with young people. If he could convince him to vote republican, there is definitively something there to explore.

            • M. Simon
            • And the bigger hint is that there are votes E.A.B doesn’t want. Probably enough to lose an election or three. How typical of the Republican base. My way or the highway. Well the highway it is then.

              But EAB is satisfied with the result. As is most of the base. Lose? “We don’t care if we have to win with THEIR KIND.”

              This is not politics. It is religion. And the elevation of politics to a religion. It will not end well.

            • E.A.B.
            • There are voters I would not *pander* to, as you seem to be urging us all to do.

              Just as there is no value in altering our platform to make it more palatable to socialist traitors, there is no value in altering our platform to make it more palatable to Libertarian backstabbers (who have been fighting alongside the socialist traitors for almost a decade now).

              I refuse to belong to a party that is willing to compromise what this nation is all about for the sake of some disloyal fringe voters.

      • E.A.B.
      • After the Democrats themselves, it is the Libertarians who are the biggest danger to small government and liberty today.

        We don’t need a part of the problem to lecture conservatives on what the solution is.

      • RyanMN
      • Don’t mind the resident cave troll, Simon. Being wrong all the time makes him fussy.

        I agree with you and the article. I know too many Republicans who proclaim themselves as “conservatives” that will jump at the chance to get the Federal or state government involved if it’s something they deem morally offensive.

        I agree with the Republicans on plenty of moral issues but true conservativism means tolerating things you might not like instead of getting the government involved. If you believe in the Constitution, truly believe in it, then it’s inevitable that there will be things in society that you will not like.

        There’s an enormous pool of untapped voters waiting to vote for a genuine conservative.

        Barry Goldwater’s “Conscience of a Conservative” should be required reading for every Republican.

        • M. Simon
        • Resident troll?

          You agree with:

          I know too many Republicans who proclaim themselves as “conservatives” that will jump at the chance to get the Federal or state government involved if it’s something they deem morally offensive.

          I agree with:

          I know too many Republicans who proclaim themselves as “conservatives” that will jump at the chance to get the Federal or state government involved if it’s something they deem morally offensive.

          And yet I’m a troll. Care to explain how that works?

    • Diane Wright
    • Voter fraud,pure & simple,(or should i say un-pure & evil),on a scope we only broached the surface of,as during the Kerry, Bush vote(v.i.a. Karl Rove,’04).
      When elections are stolen on THIS LEVEL,the very integrity of them is gone.Weather or not this is true, i don’t know,but, it sure raises my hackles bit as to it being possible…

    • MJM
    • “But it may be a continuing liability for the GOP that roughly one percent of the electorate believes strongly in limited government, but votes in a way that does not empower the GOP to do anything to limit that government.”

      Show me where in the past 25 years, when the GOP won the White House, the House or the Senate, they took that win and championed – AND ACTED ON – limited government. And when they did get wins, who did they put up as their leaders? People like George “Compassionate Conservatism” Bush, Trent “Can’t we all just get along and reach across the aisle” Lott and John “Cry me a river” Boehner.

      The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Did anyone really believe the GOP would be any different this time around (“oh, but we really meant it *this* time”)?

      But, as expected of the GOP leadership, who do they blame? The voters!

      I hate to tell the GOP, but what you’re offering is no different that any other product in the marketplace. It’s called capitalism and the free market. And when your product sucks and people stop believing the advertising copy, they’re going to shop elsewhere.

    • E.A.B.
    • Not only did the Libertarians help Obama win, that was their *intention*.

      Gary Johnson had a catch phrase near the end of the campaign: “Waste your vote.” In other words, don’t use it to stop Obama.

      Johnson staffers were also heard on election night saying they wanted to be the reason Romney lost.

      Finally, this isn’t the first time the Libertarian Party has worked for the Democrats. Back in 2004, the Libertarians were suing for “recounts” to flip Ohio (and thus the Presidency) to Kerry–even before the Democrats got on board with it.

      We don’t need to solicit advice or involvement from these backstabbers and socialist stooges.

      • jane
      • Give your anti-Libertarian hate-fest a rest, EAB. Gary Johnson pulled as many votes away from Obama as he did from Romney. The Libertarian Party is the place ex-Democrats go who can’t stand the social conservatism of the GOP. And I know, because I am one of them. The Libertarian Party, used properly, can be a vehicle to steal support from the Democrats.

        And BTW, I voted for Romney and I’m not a socialist in disguise. Grow up.

        • E.A.B.
        • Give your attempts at hijacking the GOP a rest, jane.

          The *stated objective* of Johnson’s campaign staffers was to hand the election to Obama. The Libertarian Party tried a different tactic to accomplish the same thing in 2004 (handing the election to Kerry, which failed, fortunately).

          Until you can explain the behavior of your party, and why they always hate the Republicans enough to help get the Democrat elected, but never seem to hate the Democrats enough to help get the Republican elected, then you will be regarded as fighting for the socialist side.

        • M. Simon
        • Well OK. EAB there are people out there who find the Libertarian message attractive. Do you want their votes or not? If there are votes you don’t want fine. Quitcherbitchin about losing elections.

          Drive everyone out of the Party who doesn’t meet your criteria and see if you can win elections. There was a time when the Goldwater wing (libertarian) was the center of the party. In fact if you look at the history the Libertarians were once a Republican faction. They left the party when it went socialist. You can look it up.

          • E.A.B.
          • If Libertarians are willing to give up their disregard for conservative values and liberty, then they are welcome to vote Republican.

            I for one will not support compromising those conservative values and liberties simply to pander to Libertarians who seem to like socialism better anyway (hence their actions on behalf of the Democrats in 2004 and 2012).

            If “winning elections” is all that matters, we might as well adopt the Obama administration’s agenda, since that “appeared” to be a winning formula this year.

            Driving Libertarians out of the Republican Party is a contradiction in terms. They were never Republicans or conservatives in the first place, and never intended to be. They have always been at the lunatic amoral fringe of American society.

    • ebysan
    • Can Obama still be STOPED??


      And the best part – this is “totally constitutional”.

      The 12th Amendment of the Constitution as well as Article II of the Constitution govern the “Electoral College”.

      According to the 12th Amendment, for the “Electoral College” to be able to select the president, it ….must have a “quorum of two-thirds” of the states voting.

      If enough states …..refuse to participate, the “Electoral College” will not have a quorum.

      If the Electoral College does not have a quorum or otherwise cannot vote or decide,

      then the responsibility for selecting the president and vice president devolves to the Congress.

      The “House of Representatives”……. selects the “president”

      and the “Senate” selects the “vice president”

      I hope the RI notifies all 50 States of this….We may be able to Block Obama from getting a second term!!

    • M. Simon
    • EAB,

      There were people whose votes you didn’t want. They didn’t vote for your candidate. Care to explain why that upsets you?

      I was under the impression that a party/candidate had to attract enough votes to win an election. If there is fraud the party needs even more votes.

      But OK. Care to tell me whose votes the “small government party” shouldn’t try to attract? You don’t want Libertarians (fiscally conservative, socially liberal – i.e. small government in everything) votes. That is a given. Who else?

      • E.A.B.
      • Can you seriously still claim that Libertarians are fiscal conservatives, or for small government?

        They just helped get the ultimate big government fiscal liberal reelected.

        The small government party should not pander to people like Libertarians, who don’t really care about small government as long as they can get high.

Leave A Response

* Required