The elections yesterday were not decided by the people who voted. There were many factors. The Republicans out-politicked the Democrats, because the American people seemed unaware that, albeit with far too much caving in along the way, Obama and the Democrats did more for Main Street than in any session of Congress since the LBJ administration. Republicans were able to focus on every race, because of the record spending on lying ads, secretly funded by criminal corporations. But the election was decided by the landslide majority of Americans who chose not to vote. Twenty eight nations regularly have voter turnout over 75%. But according to US Election Project, only 38.2% of the 218,054,301 eligible voters went to the polls and voted. These range from 51.5% in Oregon to 27.3% in Texas. By comparison, the turnout was 41.3% in 2006. The modern record high was 62.2% in 2008. Also key is which 38.2% voted.
…In other words, last night’s results were as much about who voted as what they voted for. Those who voted were older, whiter, and more pessimistic and frightened. Those who stayed home were the people much more likely to favor an optimistic agenda based on hope and activism. Now, of course, turnout is closely related to intensity of feelings, so clearly the matter of who voted says something about public attitudes in general. But, on the whole, it would be wrong to c nclude from last night’s results that all those people who turned out for Obama in 2008 have now changed stripes… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <NC Policy Watch>
The young people who did vote were great.
National exit polls of more than 17,000 voters show a remarkable trend: Adults age 18-29 voted against the Republican Tsunami by 16 points (56-40). Younger adults age 18-24 were even more progressive, voting against Republicans by 19 points (58-39)…
Inserted from <Alternet>
The problem was that there were not enough of them. Only 11 percent of those under 30 turned out, below the 18 percent of the 2008 election and the 13 percent who turned out in 2006.
Pundits are talking about what America wants based on the exit surveys of voters. They are talking to the wrong people. They should be talking to the people who didn’t vote.
Based on the data above 83,296,743 voted. Assuming a generous 5% average margin of victory, the difference was 4,164,837. That’s 1.9% of Americans who decided this election. That’s right. 134,757,556 Americans allowed 1.9% of their peers, mostly old, scared, and uninformed to make their decision for them. That is a national shame of epic proportions.
19 Responses to “Editorial: America’s Shame”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Thanks for an extremely well-crafted editorial, TC! As a partial payback, let me try to find you some bright points from the election.
> We still have 50 states – not the 13 Teapublicans envision … AND blacks still count as a whole person, not the 3/5 Teapublicans would really like to see
> In almost every high-profile race with a Teapublican lunatic, the Teapublican lost: O’Donnell, Angle, Miller, and Paladino are all gone! (OK – we’re stuck with Rand Paul for 6 years.)
> Dressing up as Nazi is still over the line, as Ohio’s Teapublican Rich Iott was soundly trounced
> My fellow Missourians still like puppies, as Amendment B outlawing puppy mills passed (but not by much)
> Meg Whitman single-handedly goosed the California economy by spending over $163 MILLION of her money (Thanks, Meg … they needed that!)
> And the Rasmussen “poll” has now been thoroughly documented to put its thumb – AND index finger – on the scales to purposefully favor Teapublicans (Thanks, Nate Silver of 538 … we knew that, but we needed that!)
In several Red states 2/5 of the blacks are in danger of disenfranchisement.
And Rubio and Toomey.
Many of the rest just don’t wear the uniform.
But what did they do for cats?!!? Cat is where it’s at!
Amen!
My projection of the Senate was right at 52 (discounting LIEberman)
only 38.2% of the 218,054,301 eligible voters went to the polls and voted…..The modern record high was 62.2% in 2008.
This is astonishing. So the turnout was well under two-thirds of what it was two years ago? I haven’t seen a single MSM analysis which mentioned this, but it’s obviously a key to explaining what happened.
The extremely low turnout in Texas reminds me of another important point. Blacks and Hispanics combined make up at least half of Texas’s population, and there’s a surprisingly strong gay subculture in the DFW area. Texas also has a high level of income inequality (that is, lots of poor people). If the Texans who voted were representative of the state population, it would be a reliably blue state. With Texas as a blue state, it’s hard to see how the Republicans would ever again get the electoral votes to win the Presidency. But as a friend who lives there has told me, the millions of people in Texas who would naturally lean Democratic tend to be apathetic and not vote. The low turn-out figure here supports that. Maybe we need to be looking more closely at GOTV in Texas.
If the MSM mentions it, it kills their talking points.
Good point!
I saw low turn out by 11 Am when I had voted do a rough count of the four machines in the room the highest reading 54 the lowest 26
(yeah I walked around and looked at the machine screen totals and told each precinct captain it would be best if they removed the left behind campaign literature from the voting booth because a poll watcher could cite it as a foul)
I can assume that after about 4 hours of voting maybe 150 people. In a predominantly Black neighborhood that was bombarded by…nothing. Except a neighbor talking. No door bell, handshaking personal phone calling. Virg Bernero was running for Governor and the closest he came to my area was 15 miles away on the other side of town at a single rally with Clinton at his side and to my amazement only 500 ppl showed up.
Michigan went 100% red, red as blood on the streets Tuesday and the new governor (Snyder) was a self paid for campaigner with a track record of working for Gateway computer which shipped 43,000 jobs overseas. The very people that didn’t vote are the ones he is going after first same as the last republican governor did, same as the house in DC is going to do. Them that have the least have too much and he will do what he can to take it away.
My neighborhood may not know it yet but it just became a more violent, less easy place to live by a factor of 3 and the prison industry is going to be one of the highest beneficiaries if we can find a way to keep cops on the streets.
Sadly, Mark, America has earned her punishment and saddled the rest of us with it too.
Interestiung figures, TC. As I’ve said elsewhere, I don’t get it with the paranoid fears of senior citizens. Don’t they understand that the party they just voted in wants to delete Social Security? I’m not surprised at the low turn-out for a mid-term election or at the young people not making a show. But the so-called mature Democrats who went fishing should be hanging their heads in shame.
Leslie, they get most of their news from the MSM.
Indeed they should.
You have raised a great number of valid points here, TomCat, and you correctly identified the problem as being not so much what was being voted for but who was doing the voting. Another aspect of the Obamapresidency having had caused part of this problem was not only his caving to the Republicans on a number of issues, but that the tremendous organization which got him elected all but shut down. Remember the daily and sometimes semi-daily emails you got from his committee during the 2008 campaign? It all but disappeared on 1/21/09, didn’t it? Had his email and texting communication been repeated even weekly to his millions of active young supporters ever since inauguration day, he would have seemed less aloof and distant, and more inspiring. Had he kept up such direct contact regularly, he would have inspired much greater positive voter feedback on his major initiatives. The astroturf Tea Party activity may have been nipped in the bud. Certainly, it would have inspired more young and more progressive voters to get out the vote and our losses would have been far less. To succeed in product marketing OR politics, one’s name and/or image must be out CONSTANTLY in the public eye! Think about it: Coca Cola is a product that is known and purchased by nearly everyone on the globe. Why, then, do they continue to flood TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, and the internet with product ads? Simple: they want to remain in the public eye and ear at all times. They do so in a number of different ways, designed to enhance desire and minimize fatigue. So too must it now be with political figures if they want to retain strong following…
That’s an excellent point, Jack. The only thing I got from them was regular requests for $$$
You guys said it all. I am surprised as anyone about the low turnout; there’s not excuse for that. I vote so therefore I get to complain. My MIL laughed at that one.
I get to complain too, Lisa.
Gee, I’m old, white, and scared so I voted straight Democratic ticket. I’m scared of the Republicans and the damage they have already done. I want to keep them away from my government!
Cellophane, I agree. I am 68 and have voted straight Democratic for decades.
You two, I also used the word uninformed in that description. You are informed, so you don’t count. 😉
Two of the biggest parts of the Obama machine in ’08 were the under 30’s and the Rust Belt Dems. The under 30’s didn’t show up in numbers (I’d bet half of them couldn’t name their congressman- I couldn’t when I was that young either). In 08 it was about Obama, he was a star, a phenomenon; no Obama, low turn out among the young. Too many don’t really ‘get it”, how important congressional state, and local elections are.
And many of the Rust Belt Dems became Reagan Dems, and either flipped or stayed home. And that’s a huge problem for Obama in 2012. He’ll get Pennsylvania back in 2012 with the huge turnout in Philly, but Ohio will be a big problem for him. Like Florida was necessary for Gore in 2000, Obama must have Ohio in 2012 or he’ll lose re-election..
Really, Hugh? I was out of activism from my late 20s to my early 50s. But there was never a time that I did not know who represented me and what their positions were. Amazing!
You are so right, TC. I keep emphasizing anywhere I can that the problem did not lie with who voted but with the Democrats who did not get up off the couch and go cast their ballots. Some didn’t go on purpose because they were mad at Obama for not doing every single thing they wanted him to do in the first two years of his presidency. Others were just apathetic. Either way, they are to blame for this outcome.
Thanks Mimi. It’s national masochism.