November 7, 2012

Who voted for whom

NBC - The white portion of the electorate dropped to 72%, and the president won just 39% of that vote. But he carried a whopping 93% of black voters (representing 13% of the electorate), 71% of Latinos (representing 10%), and also 73% of Asians (3%). What’s more, despite all the predictions that youth turnout would be down, voters 18-29 made up 19% of last night’s voting population -- up from 18% four years ago -- and President Obama took 60% from that group....

Obama’s demographic edge creates this dilemma for the Republican Party: It can no longer rely on white voters to win national elections anymore, especially in presidential cycles. Indeed, according to the exit poll, 89% of all votes Mitt Romney won last night came from whites (compared with 56% for Obama). ... And come 2016, the white portion of the electorate will probably drop another couple of points to 70%...

With Obama’s re-election, we now have the first time since Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe that Americans have elected three two-term presidents in a row… Tammy Baldwin will become the Senate’s first openly gay member… The Senate will have at least 19 female members -- the most ever -- and there’s a chance that number could increase to 20 if Heitkamp wins… Maryland and Maine became the first states to approve of gay marriage at the ballot box… And initiatives to legalize marijuana passed in Colorado and Washington state.

5 comments:

Colin Brace said...

I haven't seen any data anywhere on how the third-party candidates did. It is as if they simply don't count. Most bizarre.

MAMADOC said...

Right... they don´t... neither do the other two... We must dismantle this illegitimate democracy... and create one from our own backyards, restore the commons... OCCUPY THEIR APPLE PIE... AT THE POLLS with CANDIDATES FREE FROM PARTY POLITICKING AND SELL-OUTS...

MAMADOC said...

I am trying to find a good term in Spanish for the commons... that will be recognizable and not scary for most people... Not "socialism" but comunitarismo... lo comunal? ... specifying, stressing the great distance that separates the public from the communal or communitarian sphere... In Mexico the ejido is as close as it comes... and the ejido has gotten a bad name in many people's minds... The ejido combines private areas with communal areas... the commons I feel provides the placenta for the living organisms of families to thrive within.

Anonymous said...

"Requeza de comunidad" possibly?

BARBBF said...

SOME..INCLUDING MYSELF HAVE SOME DOUBTS ABOUT THIS ELECTION...

From the WND website:


• In September the Columbus Dispatch in Ohio reported this sad and ugly news: "More than one out of every five registered Ohio voters is probably ineligible to vote. In two counties, the number of registered voters actually exceeds the voting-age population: Northwestern Ohio's Wood County shows 109 registered voters for every 100 eligible, while in Lawrence County along the Ohio River it's a mere 104 registered per 100 eligible. Another 31 counties show registrations at more than 90 percent of those eligible, a rate regarded as unrealistic by most voting experts. The national average is a little more than 70 percent. In a close presidential election where every vote might count, which ones to count might become paramount on Election Day — and in possible legal battles afterward." The Dispatch asked Ohio's chief elections official, Secretary of State Jon Husted, what could be done about this problem. His answer? Not enough. Nine months ago, he asked U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder for a personal meeting to discuss how to balance seemingly conflicting federal laws so he could pare Ohio's dirty voter list without removing truly eligible voters. Holder's office never even bothered to reply – to either Husted or the newspaper. What does that tell you? It tells me voter fraud is and was an important tactic in re-electing Holder's boss and Democrats throughout the country. Anyway, we all know how Ohio voted.

• How about Michigan – Romney's home state? How did Obama win such a resounding victory when the polls showed the two candidates in a virtual tie? And how is it that Obama won by 9 points while Democrats suffered a string of defeats down the entire state ballot? For instance, Republicans maintained control of both the state House and the Supreme Court, while Democrats lost three ballot propositions.

• Then, of course, there is the fine work of James O'Keefe and Project Veritas, which demonstrated, over and over again on camera, the willingness and ability of Democratic operatives to cheat and commit fraud to win elections.

(clip)

How much evidence does one need to be convinced? This is just the tip of the iceberg.