Election demographics. Can we learn anything?

[carlimac]

I'm not trying to endorse any political party here but in retrospect, are there any assumptions we can make from this information that are important to us as Latter Day Saints? I know these polls aren't an exact science. But generally we can see the trends. Match those trends with the platforms of the candidates and what are we learning? What are the implications?

U.S. Presidential Election Center

I'm still trying to figure out why people voted the way they did. I had a Hispanic friend who tried to convince me that Obama voters were wealthier and better educated because he won all the wealthier states. I was skeptical. This chart shows otherwise.

Again. I'm not trying to start another heated debate. Just trying to understand.

Edited November 14, 2012 by carlimac

[skippy740]

I've been following various commentary on this... and I bring it down to the break-down of the family.

Women

More single women voted democrat because they promise more stuff - welfare, healthcare, etc.

Married women typically voted republican because they are better able to support themselves.

My conclusion? Single women (in general) are looking for help from the federal government. My theory is that they don't have a male provider for the family, so the government is taking over that responsibility.

Latino

More Latinos voted for President Obama than Gov. Romney. Why? The democratic party is the one that's "pro immigration". (We're ALL for 'immigration', but they conveniently leave off that little word "Illegal".)

My theory: If the Republican party would've talked more about values - hard work, family and opportunity, they could've gathered more of the vote.

African Americans

I'm not going to say that it's "a race thing". Historically, more African Americans have voted for the Democratic party.

My theory: If the Republican party would've talked more about traditional family (versus the President's view of being pro-same-sex marriage), I think the Republicans would've seen a better turn-out.

College Students

College students are probably voting for the Democratic party for two reasons:

1) Liberal indoctrination in schools

2) Keep the Federal Pell Grant at high levels

Are Obama voters "wealthier"? Perhaps! And this is what scares me. I think (my own theory here) is that the wealthier voters may have backed Obama to help legislate and regulate their competition out of their business.

I wish we had a candidate that would talk about the realities of Small Businesses in America - that they make up more than 80% of all businesses... and employ 80%+ of the total workforce. If you continue to beat up on small businesses, the backbone of America is in serious jeopardy.

Mitt Romey tried. However, he was TOO DEFENSIVE during his campaign. He didn't appear on any talk shows - not even on Fox News! He didn't answer any of his critics. Mitt Romney ran his campaign in a similar fashion that the LDS Church does when it gets critics. Either a selected response... or none at all.

He was simply "too stiff", too much of a "stuffed shirt"... just like most Stake Presidents I know. Perhaps more endearing for LDS... but there aren't enough LDS voters to vote him in. He needed to loosen up and let the American people get to know him. He failed.

[Wingnut]

Single women also tend to vote Democrat because of women's rights issues, not just welfare.

[carlimac]

Some of the explanations for certain groups are obvious to me like Blacks, young college age and younger women, but here are the groups I don't understand:

Why did more men vote for Romney than Obama?

Why did more college graduates vote for Romney but more post-grads vote for Obama?

What about the moderately religious? Why did they vote for Obama? Do the moderately religious see the whole " taking care of the poor" differently than the very religious who tended to vote more for Romney?

What was it about Obama's platform that appealed to the non-religious? Was is all the gay marriage issue or were there other factors involved?

Those making more than $90K/year voted more for Romney. Has anyone seen any demographics for higher incomes than that? This poll doesn't go any higher. I'd like to know who the wealthier and wealthiest voted for and why. (Aside from Hollywood-they would skew the results) What does having money or not have to do with political choices this time around?

I find this all fascinating. This friend of mine is Hispanic, very well educated, a wealthy doctor, Mormon and voted for Obama. His reasons were "off" in my opinion. It sounded like he was heavily influenced by the immigration problems. He said Romney wanted to see people running from violent lives in Mexico get electricuted on the border fences. (rolled my eyes at that one) He also said more very poor people voted for Romney than Obama. I disagree with that one, too. I haven't heard of very many doctors who are in favor of Obamacare, but he must be OK with it.

Besides the religious reasons people had for voting for or against either candidate, I'm finding the psychological and sociological aspects of it interesting but sometimes puzzling, too.

Edited November 14, 2012 by carlimac

[prisonchaplain]

Why did the undecided or independents vote for Obama? My sense is that many women, poor people, minorities FELT that Romney was not about them. They accepted a gut level impression that Obama understood them better and would look out for them better than Romney would. In retrospect the comment about 47% being government dependent and never voting for him reinforced this impression, and was devastating.

None of this has to do with facts, fairness, or accuracy. It's a gut-level feeling that many groups of folks overwhelmingly had about Romney. Those impressions likely bleed over to the party he represented. So, future Republican candidates will have to think long and hard about how they can stay true to their core ideas and beliefs, and yet demonstrate their openness and understanding of all Americans.

[Guest]

Just some ramblings:

Okay, I asked around here...

My nephew is in college - ALL his friends who voted for Obama had only one reason - "I need my Pell Grant or my student loan paid off".

My friend's wife is hispanic - voted Obama. Her reason - "Republicans hate hispanics. That self-deportation thing is so insulting." I asked her, "You're insulted by the self-deportation statement but you're okay with Fast & Furious?". Her answer, "What's Fast & Furious?".

Her husband voted Obama. I asked him why and he said, I've never voted Republican before. I asked him, why not? And he said - they're old, white, men. (He's a young white man). So, I listed an issue, gave the dem position and the rep position but didn't tell him which is which... every single issue I listed, he chose the rep position. So, I told him every single one he chose was a rep position and he said... oh, I guess I should have voted for Romney.

I asked another friend why he voted Obama - his answer - Reps are going to make abortion illegal. And so I asked him, any other reason? (He's a guy, I would think abortion wouldn't be high on his list)... he said, no, I don't really know anything about politics.

I asked another friend why he voted Obama - he's black -he said Republicans are racists. I asked him - Republicans appointed the first and second black Secretary of States... the 2nd of which is a woman... and appointed the first black Supreme Court Judge. They even had a presidential candidate who is black. He said they were all Uncle Toms. So, I asked him, is there another reason besides the Reps are racists? He said... yes, Romney is going to send all our jobs to China.

Okay, I am hoping these guys are not a good representation of the nation. But, it is still my observation that in YouTube - most, if not all, Pro-Romney videos that are open to likes/dislikes, have a significantly higher number of dislikes, while Pro-Obama videos are the opposite. The media went on selective news reporting where CNN went liberal and Fox stayed conservative and all the others are a joke. Celebrities who are pro-Obama are happy to admit it, those who are pro-Romney have to hide it, lest they get treated like Sabrina... So, in popular media (the only source of political info for most folks these days), Obama is controlling the message, Romney can't seem to penetrate it.

And there's the values shift - Florida... a state where marriage is defined as being man and woman by majority vote in 2008... voted down a bid to block government spending on abortion. Pot is now legal in certain states - that's after reports of teen use of marijuana shot up 70% in states that have legalized medical marijuana accompanied by the statistics of marijuana users that go on to harder substances being high and marijuana users who end up committing a crime also high. I guess majority of those in the 2 states that legalized marijuana don't believe the statistics.

The world's a-changing...

Edited November 14, 2012 by anatess

[HoosierGuy]

I think the angry white men in the U.S. are getting fewer in number and that is a good thing. Let the women, minorities and liberal men run the U.S.A.!

And women and minorities are not "takers." They simply expect to live in a modern country the same way Europeans expect their countries to be modern and offer modern services like universal healthcare.

[Windseeker]

The Republican Party’s problem is messaging and image.

We come across as the party for rich white men, when the truth is that it’s the Democrats who are the wealthy ones. (George Soros anyone??)

Where I live in a middle class neighborhood it was 20 to 1 signs for Romney over Obama. You go to the neighborhoods of waterfront mansions and it’s 20 to 1 for Obama. In one rich neighborhood by my daughters art school there was not one Romney sign in sight anywhere.

7 of the top 10 wealthiest Congressmen are Democrats. During the 2008 presidential campaign, many more donations from banks and Wall Street investment firms went to Democrats. Seventy-five percent of hedge fund donors supported President Obama's campaign, and 90 of 100 top corporate campaign donors contributed to the DNC or Democrat campaigns. The majority of donations to President Obama's re-election campaign were from large, not small donors, like Jon Corzine, who gave nearly $1 million to Democrat causes through the Goldman Sachs PAC. The founders of these company’s gave exclusively to Democrats. LinkedIn (30,800), Netflix(12,000), Adobe(190,000),Google(70,000), Bill Gates Foundation(130,000), Yahoo(35,000).

Republicans the party of Greed???...I’m sure it’s common knowledge by now that Republicans give so much more of their own money to charity then Democrats.

Mitt Romney was lambasted for his wealth and his overseas investments and our liar and chief had the nerve to tell Romney to check his own Pension, when one – Romney doesn’t have a Pension (*you idiot) and two – Obama’s pension plan has investments in foreign companies and through a Caymans trust. And Romney’s a Rich White Guy who attended private schools and went to Ivy League colleges while Obama is a Rich Black Guy who attended private schools and went to Ivy League colleges. But for some reason the racist electorate couldn’t see him as coming from privilege. Oh well when he retires he has his 40 to 60 million Hawaiian Estate waiting for him all thanks to our tax dollars.

When it comes to women, Republican women are simply far more intelligent, younger and more appealing. Nikki Haley, Susana Martinez and Michele Bachmann could easily walk all over Diane Fienstein, Patty Murry and Nancy Pelosi. I’m confident Condoleezza Rice could best Hillary as well. Notice their race? Nikki Haley (Sikh), Susana Martinez (Latino), Condoleezza Rice (Black). Republicans have the more Latino Governors than the Democrats. So why do the Republicans parade the likes of Sarah Palin before the electorate is beyond me when there were so many other notable women in the party.

Speaking of Women, Senate Democrat staffers in 2011 had an average salary of $60,877, whereas male staffers made about $6,500 more. Obama administration's record dims a bit further. Female employees earn a median salary of $60,000, roughly 18 percent less than men, whose median salary is $71,000.

I know a gay hispanic female educator that has become completely converted to conservatism. All it took was for her was to on her own, look into the facts and to hold those who engage in false rhetoric accountable and everything just clicked into place. But it took effort and she lost allot of her friends because of it.

Facts are fair but all these facts don’t mean a thing because people don’t want to believe them. Republicans (like parents of teenagers) don’t make anyone feel good. Democrats make people feel good. When has it ever just felt good to be a Republican? Our desire to be above the fray and stick to principle makes it easy for the lies to go unanswered and when we do try to tell the truth we get drowned out or called names. Conservative Ideas (though true) are not easy to grasp which makes it an up hill battle. Our image sucks and wasn’t helped by the likes of Murdock and others who can’t seem to stay on message or simply shouldn’t be representing our party in the first place. I could go on and on but it's pointless.

[jerome1232]

I think the angry white men in the U.S. are getting fewer in number and that is a good thing. Let the women, minorities and liberal men run the U.S.A.!

And women and minorities are not "takers." They simply expect to live in a modern country the same way Europeans expect their countries to be modern and offer modern services like universal healthcare.

What's that old adage?

'Be careful what you wish for'

[skippy740]

I think the angry white men in the U.S. are getting fewer in number and that is a good thing. Let the women, minorities and liberal men run the U.S.A.!

And women and minorities are not "takers." They simply expect to live in a modern country the same way Europeans expect their countries to be modern and offer modern services like universal healthcare.

And how's that going for them?

[Windseeker]

I think the angry white men in the U.S. are getting fewer in number and that is a good thing. Let the women, minorities and liberal men run the U.S.A.!

And women and minorities are not "takers." They simply expect to live in a modern country the same way Europeans expect their countries to be modern and offer modern services like universal healthcare.

Dude!

What are you talking about. You're one of the angriest whitest guys I know on this board.

[HoosierGuy]

Dude!

What are you talking about. You're one of the angriest whitest guys I know on this board.

But for liberal/progressive causes. U.S. job protection, unions, universal healthcare, equal pay among the sexes, marriage equality, U.S.A. first, workers rights, etc... And now I'm for the legalization of drugs. I do believe it would greatly reduce the high crime rate in major cities like Chicago.

[Guest]

But for liberal/progressive causes. U.S. job protection, unions, universal healthcare, equal pay among the sexes, marriage equality, U.S.A. first, workers rights, etc...

Okay, let me give you a bit of facts. You know that steel worker who lost his job and his wife died because "Romney doesn't care"? He lost his job because Unions stonewalled the restructuring of the steel plant and Bain had no choice but to close the plant down. If they would have agreed to restructure their Union contracts, the plant would have remained open, the company would have become competitive, the workers wouldn't just keep their jobs, they can continue to expand and get more workers as steel was still in demand and eventually, the Unions would have gained money. But no... the Unions were idiots but they can blame Romney for it who was not even in Bain because Hoosier would just believe it hook, line, and sinker.

You know Hurricane Sandy? People from the Virginias and Carolinas came with their trucks to help rebuild the power lines and water lines. A mob of Union workers blocked them because rebuilding power lines and water lines is a Union job. Until today, there's still no power and no water. How's that for US job protection?

Do you even know what US job protection means? You have 20+ million people out of work. How did the liberal/progressives protect their job?

Equal pay among the sexes? What's that? Women lost more jobs than men in the last 4 years. How's that for equal pay? Do you know that in Obama's staff women on average made less than men? Do you know what that means?

Marriage equality? What's that? Anybody should be able to marry anybody? Try marrying your cousin...

USA First? What's that mean? Feed your ambassador (a civilian position equivalent in rank to a 4-star general) and 3 of your diplomats to the terrorists and then apologize for a video? That's USA first? Oh, and not only that - why don't we jail the guy who made the video while preventing the FBI from investigating Benghazi? That's USA First? How about send unmarked high-powered weapons to Mexican cartels and let them shoot each other? Is that what you mean by USA first?

And now I'm for the legalization of drugs. I do believe it would greatly reduce the high crime rate in major cities like Chicago.

Legalization of drugs will reduce the high crime rate? Whatcha smoking?

Oh, I see... because it's legal it wouldn't be a crime anymore to buy it... I mean, it doesn't matter if you kill somebody in the process of purchasing your drugs because you can't seem to stay away from the thing and you have no money to pay for it - so you bop some old lady on the head to take her purse. Or get in debt with some Chicago druglord who will have to shoot you.

And it doesn't matter that your brains go mush causing the taxpayers to have to pay your healthcare and your food stamps when you're high as a kite every single day.

No, doesn't matter. Because, hey it's legal! It's reducing the crime rate!

Edited November 14, 2012 by anatess

[Just_A_Guy]

And women and minorities are not "takers." They simply expect to live in a modern country the same way Europeans expect their countries to be modern and offer modern services like universal healthcare.

I'm not a "taker", Daddy. I just want you to give me a pony, like all the other little girls have! Who cares if it puts the family in bankruptcy? Who cares if you have to work eighty-hour weeks to afford it? IT'S MY RIGHT AND I WANT IT NOW AND YOU DON'T LOVE ME IF YOU DON'T GIVE ME EXACTLY WHAT I WANT RIGHT THIS MINUTE!!!!!!!

. . . equal pay among the sexes . . .

Why do you think Obama will fix that, when the women on his own staff earn 18% less than the men do?

. . . first, workers rights . . .

Hey, did you hear unions are about to force Hostess into liquidation because they're striking rather than accepting the compromises being offered to them via Hostess' current Chapter 11 bankruptcy?

And now I'm for the legalization of drugs. I do believe it would greatly reduce the high crime rate in major cities like Chicago.

Yes, ending Prohibition did wonders for our national DUI rate.

Edited November 14, 2012 by Just_A_Guy

[Bini]

A couple days ago on a local news channel here in Utah, there was a segment covered on Romney that interviewed some of the individuals that worked closely alongside his campaign. They discussed this very topic and were open about a couple faux pas that really soured his grapes. First item they pinpointed on was the comment at the Summer Olympics that should have never been said. The second item they pinpointed on was the overwhelming stance on social issues. It was discussed that while many Americans felt that Romney might have been the better candidate to address the American budget, many did not agree with his firm stand on social issues, that obviously affected the vast majority of the election demographics. As an ending point, they left on the note that due to the current election demographics, it would be wise for the Republican party to not emphasise on social issues (because they cannot win elections this way) and instead focus on their strong points.

We felt comfortable and at peace with voting for Obama, primarily because we support Unions and we are passionate about certain social issues that Romney and his campaign were not. So that's were we, my husband and I, fit into the election demographics.

[skippy740]

That's true. Romney stuck to ONE message: The economy... and thought that would be enough.

He was wrong.

[Just_A_Guy]

Why did more college graduates vote for Romney but more post-grads vote for Obama?

Post-grads gravitate towards academia or the law, both bastions of liberalism. Plus, most of them carry staggering amounts of student debt. It's hard to pull the lever against the guy who, via the IBR program, moved your monthly loan payments from $1500 to $0 and promises to forgive $50-$100k of your debt over the next twenty years. Particularly if you got a PhD on some obscure topic in the Humanities and have no visible career path beyond retail sales or food service.

[carlimac]

Dude!

What are you talking about. You're one of the angriest whitest guys I know on this board.

(Putting on my pseudo mod hat) Alright guys. Simmer. We don't want this thread closed, too.

[bytor2112]

That's true. Romney stuck to ONE message: The economy... and thought that would be enough.

He was wrong.

Well..in fairness Romney was an evil corporate raider, causes cancer, is a felon, wants to take women back to the 50's, was going to give 5 trillion dollars in tax cuts to his rich buddies, didn't pay taxes for ten years according to fellow Mormon and Senate Majority Leader, his wife had rich people horses,he actually worked for his money, really believes in God, not someone you want to have a beer with and actually believed in the American people and that Americans shouldn't be required to live off the government dole, that real jobs with high wages could actually be created and not just talked about and.....well, you get the idea....REALLY out of touch.

[skippy740]

(Putting on my pseudo mod hat) Alright guys. Simmer. We don't want this thread closed, too.

Well, at least without you knowing about it! (Sorry, I had to!)

[Wingnut]

What was it about Obama's platform that appealed to the non-religious? Was is all the gay marriage issue or were there other factors involved?

I would venture a guess that this is more of a party issue than it is a candidate issue. The Republican party is a religious one, while the Democratic party is sometimes athestic, but more often, just doesn't care what your religion is.

I asked another friend why he voted Obama - he's black -he said Republicans are racists. I asked him - Republicans appointed the first and second black Secretary of States... the 2nd of which is a woman... and appointed the first black Supreme Court Judge. They even had a presidential candidate who is black. He said they were all Uncle Toms. So, I asked him, is there another reason besides the Reps are racists? He said... yes, Romney is going to send all our jobs to China.

Okay, well, to be fair, the Democratic party has a president who is black, not just a candidate.

A couple days ago on a local news channel here in Utah, there was a segment covered on Romney that interviewed some of the individuals that worked closely alongside his campaign. They discussed this very topic and were open about a couple faux pas that really soured his grapes. First item they pinpointed on was the comment at the Summer Olympics that should have never been said. The second item they pinpointed on was the overwhelming stance on social issues. It was discussed that while many Americans felt that Romney might have been the better candidate to address the American budget, many did not agree with his firm stand on social issues, that obviously affected the vast majority of the election demographics. As an ending point, they left on the note that due to the current election demographics, it would be wise for the Republican party to not emphasise on social issues (because they cannot win elections this way) and instead focus on their strong points.

We felt comfortable and at peace with voting for Obama, primarily because we support Unions and we are passionate about certain social issues that Romney and his campaign were not. So that's were we, my husband and I, fit into the election demographics.

Same here. To pretty much all of this.

Well, at least without you knowing about it! (Sorry, I had to!)

Lol.

[bytor2112]

Post-grads gravitate towards academia or the law, both bastions of liberalism. Plus, most of them carry staggering amounts of student debt. It's hard to pull the lever against the guy who, via the IBR program, moved your monthly loan payments from $1500 to $0 and promises to forgive $50-$100k of your debt over the next twenty years. Particularly if you got a PhD on some obscure topic in the Humanities and have no visible career path beyond retail sales or food service.

Yep and equally hard to pull a lever for a guy that is going to heal the planet and lower the ocean levels....maybe in his second term

[carlimac]

A couple days ago on a local news channel here in Utah, there was a segment covered on Romney that interviewed some of the individuals that worked closely alongside his campaign. They discussed this very topic and were open about a couple faux pas that really soured his grapes. First item they pinpointed on was the comment at the Summer Olympics that should have never been said. The second item they pinpointed on was the overwhelming stance on social issues. It was discussed that while many Americans felt that Romney might have been the better candidate to address the American budget, many did not agree with his firm stand on social issues, that obviously affected the vast majority of the election demographics. As an ending point, they left on the note that due to the current election demographics, it would be wise for the Republican party to not emphasise on social issues (because they cannot win elections this way) and instead focus on their strong points.

We felt comfortable and at peace with voting for Obama, primarily because we support Unions and we are passionate about certain social issues that Romney and his campaign were not. So that's were we, my husband and I, fit into the election demographics.

Everyone has to make their own choices and at least you seemed to make an educated choice, (unlike many Obama supporters). But I worry that our country is supporting social change that ultimately won't be in our best interest. Not "our interest" as in us- Conservatives vs. them-Liberals, but us as in everyone.

Is legalizing late term abortion really in the best interest of the women that undergo them (not forgetting the baby who's life is being taken) while the world stands by heartbroken? It's a lose/lose/lose situation. I would argue that the women were able to use their free agency (choice) when they had sex. If they are really unable to raise the child, there are plenty of people who would adopt a baby. Let's not bring rape into the mix. I think we all recognize that there is a wide range of legitimacy when it comes to labeling something "rape". Sounds harsh but I don't believe every so-called "rape" is one sided nor every woman a victim. Some rapes are just that, but not all. Complete honesty is by both parties involved is needed to determine that.

Is gay marriage really in the best eternal interest of those who choose to give in to their attractions and who also drag children into a confused and unnatural situation?

Is legalizing drugs really in the best interest of drug users? My son served his mission in Colorado where many were using marijuana legally for medicinal purposes. (Ha! That's a laugh. They no more needed it for their health than they needed vodka for a headache.) And he saw firsthand the abuses, even then.

Is expanding our country's welfare system really and truly in the best interest of everyone? Is being legally forced to give and even bigger portion of what we honestly earn through hard work really going to help the poor? All the poor? There are definitely some who we as a society need to take care of...better than we do right now. And I believe in the compassion of Americans to watch out for them. No one begrudges donating for a quadripelegic vet or those who are mentally retarded and can't earn a living. But to have our money legally stripped away from us takes away our agency. That's not good for the takers, the tax payers or the receivers.

My fear is that in championing some of these social issues that liberals are all for, we're missing the bigger and more eternal principles that are at stake.

Edited November 14, 2012 by carlimac

[Windseeker]

(Putting on my pseudo mod hat) Alright guys. Simmer. We don't want this thread closed, too.

Sorry, the ”Dude!” was meant to soften the whole thing. Kind of like that fool of a took Joe Bidens ”My friend”

Heres a smilie for ya

[Bini]

Everyone has to make their own choices and at least you seemed to make an educated choice, (unlike many Obama supporters). But I worry that our country is supporting social change that ultimately won't be in our best interest. Not "our interest" as in us- Conservatives vs. them-Liberals, but us as in everyone.

Is legalizing late term abortion really in the best interest of the women that undergo them (not forgetting the baby who's life is being taken) while the world stands by heartbroken? It's a lose/lose/lose situation. I would argue that they were able to use their free agency when they had sex. If they are really unable to raise the child, there are plenty of people who would adopt a baby.

Is gay marriage really in the best eternal interest of those who choose to give in to their attractions and who also drag children into a confused and unnatural situation?

Is legalizing drugs really in the best interest of drug users? My son served his mission in Colorado where many were using marijuana leagally for medicinal purposes. (Ha! That's a laugh. They no more needed it for their health than they needed vodka for a headache.) And he saw firsthand the abuses, even then.

Is expanding our country's welfare system really and truly in the best interest of everyone? Is being legally forced to give and even bigger portion of what we honestly earn through hard work really going to help the poor? All the poor? There are definitely some who we as a society need to take care of...better than we do right now. And I believe in the compassion of Americans to watch out for them. No one begrudges donating for a quadripelegic vet or those who are mentally retarded and can't earn a living. But to have our money legally stripped away from us takes away our agency. That's not good for the takers, the tax payers or the receivers.

My fear is that in championing some of these social issues that liberals are all for, we're missing the bigger and more eternal principles that are at stake.

When social issues directly affect individuals and their family, that plays a big role in how they cast their ballots. I wouldn't be so quick to judge these people with a blanket statement that boils down to: Obama supporters are uneducated with their votes.

That's all I'll add. I shared where my husband and I fit into the election demographics, and why but I'm not interested in going back and forth debating politics at this point. And I'll leave with all my comments being mud free :)