Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
The votes are still being tallied, but it is very clear that the Romney campaign and allied groups didn’t come even close to delivering all the voters they could have, or should have, on Election Day.
I produced a very rough total for the vote by taking the state totals and increasing each candidate's share by the percentage yet to be counted in each state: 66.2 million votes for Obama, 62.5 million for Romney.
In 2008, John McCain received about 60 million votes, a couple of million short of Romney. But, of course, the population has increased. When you look at the votes as a share of the voting eligible population, Romney pulled in almost exactly the same proportion of votes as McCain did in ’08.
Romney’s campaign, despite all the turmoil and billions of dollars, could not turn out more voters than John McCain.
This is a stunning failure. Epic. And even more so when we look at the percentage of likely supporters each side turned out this year. The electorate has become more Republican and less Democratic since 2008 . . . in other words, Romney had a bigger pool of likely voters that he could draw from to outperform Obama.
I apportioned the voting eligible population in 2008 to the full 7-point party identification breakdowns for 2012. In other words, if 28 percent of the population identified as a Strong Dem, then I assigned 28 percent of the VEP to Stong Dems, and did that for each category (and split pure Indies 50/50).
In 2008, Obama’s campaign turned out 59 percent of their likely supporters, and McCain’s campaign turned out 63 percent of his likely supporters (there were a lot more Dems).
In 2012, Romney’s campaign turned out just 59 percent of potential supporters to Obama’s 58 percent.
In other words, Obama and his allies turned out about the same proportion of a smaller pool of likely supporters, and Romney, et al, failed utterly to capitalize on the shift in party ID and ideology. Looking at the relative declines in various states, I think Sean Trende is on to something with his speculation about who failed to show up and why, especially in Ohio.
The more I look at these numbers, the more angry I get . . . this election did not have to be lost.
- Comment (63)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (7)
Comments:
Apr '11
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
I think this then is clearly a sign that Republicans/ their supporters don't think things are bad enough to merit putting in five minutes to get an absentee ballot and filling it out.
I mean Karl Rove spent hundreds of millions of dollars on adds, but I guess he should have spent it on hiring some "volunteers" to go out register and help every rural Ohioan, Floridian, and Virginian that disliked Obama get an absentee ballot. How hard is that? I mean surely for you could have done that for 100,000,000 dollars. Right?
Nov '11
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
Obama: 2008 -- 69,456,897; 2012 -- ~60,893,653
Obama received about 8,563,244 fewer votes, a decrease of 12.33%.
Republican candidate: 2008 -- 59,934,814; ~57,957,207
The Republican candidate received about 1, 977,607 fewer votes, a decrease of 3.30%.
.....
The thing about Romney receiving fewer votes is that we don't know from which states those missing voters were located -- without doing some detailed analysis. A lot more votes from New York, the Pacific Coast states, and New England might have produced the exact same result.
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
I took the state totals, which also have % reporting, and increased by that missing % . . . probably smaller precincts not reporting, but I'm sure some dysfunctional big cities are out too . . . either way, the Romney campaign and allied groups were a disaster at turnout.
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
Valiuth: I think this then is clearly a sign that Republicans/ their supporters don't think things are bad enough to merit putting in five minutes to get an absentee ballot and filling it out.
I mean Karl Rove spent hundreds of millions of dollars on adds, but I guess he should have spent it on hiring some "volunteers" to go out register and help every rural Ohioan, Floridian, and Virginian that disliked Obama get an absentee ballot. How hard is that? I mean surely for you could have done that for 100,000,000 dollars. Right? · 2 minutes ago
Exactly . . . instead they blew it all on crappy ads, robo-calls, and mail drops.
Apr '11
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
You've written a lot about how Obama's GOTV operation is amazing. The polls said that roughly the portion of voters that wanted Obama to win voted for Obama. How is equaling an amazing GOTV operation proof of having a terrible GOTV operation?
Apr '11
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
Adam Schaeffer
Valiuth: I think this then is clearly a sign that Republicans/ their supporters don't think things are bad enough to merit putting in five minutes to get an absentee ballot and filling it out.
I mean Karl Rove spent hundreds of millions of dollars on adds, but I guess he should have spent it on hiring some "volunteers" to go out register and help every rural Ohioan, Floridian, and Virginian that disliked Obama get an absentee ballot. How hard is that? I mean surely for you could have done that for 100,000,000 dollars. Right? · 2 minutes ago
Exactly . . . instead they blew it all on crappy ads, robo-calls, and mail drops. · 3 minutes ago
In the past, you've talked about the problem with the RNC GOTV operation being that it relied too heavily on paid rather than volunteering canvassers. Are you now saying that they should have focused more on having paid canvassers?
I agreed with you at the time that the lack of conservative volunteers was likely to cost us the election, but I don't recall your suggesting a strategy for getting those volunteers; just repeated statements that they were needed.
Jul '11
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
It boils down to the fact that most people just aren't hurting enough to realize how bad it is and how bad it will become. The media, the stimulus, entitlements, and television reality shows kept enough blinded.
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
James Of England
You've written a lot about how Obama's GOTV operation is amazing. The polls said that roughly the portion of voters that wanted Obama to win voted for Obama. How is equaling an amazing GOTV operation proof of having a terrible GOTV operation? · 0 minutes ago
Not sure I understand . . . the Dems have lower income/educ voters who vote naturally at lower rates, and their GOTV and persuasion efforts boost that rate significantly.
Republicans have a base that naturally votes at a higher rate, and they did nothing to boost that, and failed to turn out marginal voters on their side.
The polls predict the vote using a likely voter screen, which includes a respondent's self-reported likelihood of turning out. They proved quite accurate once again. But that doesn't mean there weren't a lot of Rep voters left on the table.
Nov '12
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
As has been pointed out on other websites, it was not that the Obama machine was able to turn out more votes in its base, it's that his machine was able to depress the pool of voters that Romney had available.
In other words, the Obama strategy of making Romney out to be a heartless plutocrat who is alien to working-class folks (his June/July negative add barrage in Ohio) worked. White, working-class voters may not have liked Obama all that much, but the ground was poisoned and Romney had little chance of motivating them to go to the polls.
I guess this is the new political reality for future elections - don't base your campaign on ideas, simply work to destroy your opponent's credibility as much as possible and then whip your own base up into a frenzy ..... scary!
But then again, isn't that what then State Senator Obama did to Jack Ryan to win the open IL Senate seat in 2006...destroy the opponent....
Edited on November 9, 2012 at 12:32amMay '12
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
We don't have to look at this only as a failure of Romney or his campaign. This can also be viewed as a failure of us. We didn't show up to vote, for whatever reason. Why didn't we show up? It can't entirely be the campaign's fault. Did the circus show that was the Republican debates have something to do with it? When we ourselves try to paint one of our candidates in the same rhetoric as the Dems do?
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
SunnyOptimism: As has been pointed out on other websites, it was not that the Obama machine was able to turn out more votes in its base, it's that his machine was able to depress the pool of voters that Romney had available.
In other words, the Obama strategy of making Romney out to be a heartless plutocrat who is alien to working-class folks (his June/July negative add barrage in Ohio) worked. White, working-class voters may not have liked Obama all that much, but the ground was poisoned and Romney had little chance of motivating them to go to the polls.
I guess this is the new political reality for future elections - don't base your campaign on ideas, simply work to destroy your opponent's credibility as much as possible and then whip your own base up into a frenzy ..... scary!
The choice to not vote is a perfectly reasonable choice . . . The Romney campaign shouldve worked to nudge those voters and drag them to the polls. They didn't. They failed. Obama's campaign did that successfully with many of their disappointed, marginal voters. Romney should've nudged those voters against turning out. They didn't.
Jul '12
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
I don't want to cast aspersions, but I have a sneaking suspicion that evangelicals who flocked to the polls for George W. Bush and Sarah Palin were less inclined to do so for a Mormon and a Catholic. I don't like to say it, but this is a thought I can't quite shake.
Oct '12
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
James Of England
Instead of spending all that money on expensive ads on tv, they should have spent it on bus rentals to take people to the polls and hot dogs to those after they voted.
May '12
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
I have to wonder if Romney's Mormonism contributed to the lower Republican turnout.
Apr '11
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
Finally, and most importantly; which states had less GOP turnout and mattered? As I understand it, in Florida, North Carolina, Michigan, Colorado, Nevada, Wisconsin, Virginia, and Iowa, the GOP vote went up. If you're suggesting that Romney's GOTV operation in Mississippi was not up to snuff, I'm willing to believe you, but I don't see why there would be such an operation (other than for downticket races).
I see you say you agree with Sean Trende's analysis that truly massive negative advertizing was responsible for Ohio not being on that list; do you in fact disagree and believe that it was because of a poor GOTV operation? Because it's the only significant state that your analysis holds true for.
Apr '11
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
It's not true. Evangelicals, nationwide, voted for Mitt in the same portions they voted for Bush, a huge increase on the Palin/ McCain ticket. They didn't improve their turnout as much as white Catholics did, but in general did well. Ralph Reed's GOTV operation appears to have been superb.
Colorado is the sole exception. Mitt improved his white evangelical turnout by about 80%. Obama improved his white evangelical turnout by about 450%, which was responsible for his win there, many times over. Still, outside Mollie's state, Mollie's co-religionists were great. I'm looking forward to her explaining this confusing phenomenon.
Apr '11
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
Adam Schaeffer
James Of England
You've written a lot about how Obama's GOTV operation is amazing. The polls said that roughly the portion of voters that wanted Obama to win voted for Obama. How is equaling an amazing GOTV operation proof of having a terrible GOTV operation? ·
Not sure I understand . . . the Dems have lower income/educ voters who vote naturally at lower rates, and their GOTV and persuasion efforts boost that rate significantly.
Republicans have a base that naturally votes at a higher rate, and they did nothing to boost that, and failed to turn out marginal voters on their side.
The polls predict the vote using a likely voter screen, which includes a respondent's self-reported likelihood of turning out. They proved quite accurate once again. But that doesn't mean there weren't a lot of Rep voters left on the table. ·
Well, OK. It could be that untouched GOP voters turn out, so Mitt's score is unimpressive. If that were the case, you'd expect a small difference between turnout in non-swing states and in swing states, where the GOTV operation had a presence. Right?
Clearly, the data denies the hypothesis.
Apr '11
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
leslie adams
James Of England
Instead of spending all that money on expensive ads on tv, they should have spent it on bus rentals to take people to the polls and hot dogs to those after they voted.
12 minutes ago
I know a fair number of people who acted as voter taxis. Are you aware of a shortage? Adam, is this something that needed more money?
I'm not aware of any large scale voter bribery from the campaign. Adam, is this something that Mitt should have spent more on?
Apr '11
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
"Us", the conservative base, totally showed up to vote. More "conservative"s voted, more regular churchgoers voted, more of all those sorts of stats. What we didn't do was volunteer or donate. A lot of Adam's "we should have been doing this" comes down to "we should have had more volunteers", and he was absolutely right about that.
May '11
Re: Double the Spending, Less Turnout . . . The Numbers on Romney vs McCain
Over at Ace of Spades there is a rant by a volunteer who seems knowledgeable about data mining saying that the Boston based ORCA iniative was a disaster that hurt more than helped. I don't know what ORCA stands for. It wasn't until late yesterday that I figured out that GOTV was not a channel I don't get in my cable package. I do know that I listened to speaches from Ralph Reed insisting that this time Republicans would beat them at their own game. He had my e-mail address and never contacted me after the first thank you for your support note early in 2011.