Here’s another look at the final results numbers, as compared with 2004
2004
62,040,606-Bush
59,028,109-Kerry
411,304 Nader
2008
63,507,800 – Obama
56,151,859 – McCain
Youth voters only ^ 1%
AA voters ^ 2%
2008
Democrat (39%) 89% supported Obama
Republican (32%) 90% supported McCain
Independent (29%) 52%Obama / 44% McCain
2004
Democrat (37%) 89% supported Kerry
Republican (37%) 93% supported Bush
Independent (26%) 48% Kerry/49% McCain
Also 84% of Hillary’s supporters, leaving 14% PUMAs (2.9 million) (corrected)
If you look at the numbers, for all the vaunted “new base” “new voters” – there’s only 3 million more votes than Kerry did – and that’s adding independents.
The ACORN advantage is probably responsible for a good chunk of it, if you think of the 100,000 of Georgians found to have voted in Ohio and Florida as well, or the 200,000 phony registrations that SCOTUS intervened to wave through in Ohio only. That accounts already for 10% of the “new voters” – and I only used 2 news stories.
The big story here is the Christian right.
While ostensibly, the Saddleback debate put McCain on top and no one showed up at Obama’s Values tour, it is clear to me that deals were made behind closed doors.
The anecdote about the Bush voter who stayed home because this time his pastor didn’t tell him to go is even more significant if one considers the passage of proposition 8 in California.
The Obama campaign allowed Obama’s voice to be used in robocalls saying Obama opposed gay marriage.
B0bots were not told to vote against it. They did vote for a proposition taking care of chickens. left the gays out – as price for the Christian right staying home.
During the primary, Bush’s spiritual adviser endorsed Obama. Said he told Bush about it and agreed. Bush in turn added: He (Obama) is a good man.
Look at the numbers again: PUMAs voting McCain might have overcame the – REAL – new voters.
The real difference in numbers is the nearly 6 million Bush voters whose ministers didn’t tell to go out and vote. The result of a back door deal.
Look at Obama winking and promising them money
Reaching out to evangelical voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is announcing plans that would expand President Bush’s program steering federal social service dollars to religious groups and — in a move sure to cause controversy — support their ability to hire and fire based on faith.
And I cannot help myself from posting that joke too
Comedy writer Patrick Gorse: “Barack Obama announced on Tuesday that he supports federally funded faith-based initiatives. This is kind of self-serving when you consider that supporting a one-term Senator for president is itself a faith-based initiative.”
We already know the gays paid part of the price. I am waiting to see how women will pay the balance.
This is after all, the Year of the Penis.
Update
Leaders of the successful Proposition 8 campaign say an unusual coalition of evangelical Christians, Mormons and Roman Catholics built a majority at the polls Tuesday by harnessing the organizational muscle of churches to a mainstream message about what school children might be taught about gay relationships if the ban failed.
yeah, but this still doesn’t explain why in california, where Obama won by 20 points proposition 8 was defeated. Of course, one may remember the 2004 narrative: “Bush won thanks to Blacks coming out to vote against gay rights”. I guess there was a different goal, different lies to justificate then.
24 comments
November 6, 2008 at 9:07 am
JD
You’re spot on, as usual.
I was certain that a good Republican turnout + the PUMAs would have equaled a McCain victory. (Even if ACORN stuffed the ballot boxes)
Obama this summer DID say he would further the role of the Church Outreach programs implemented by Bush.
In fact, during his campaign Obama’s rhetoric mimicked “more of the same,” in more than one arena.
As Walters likes to say “be careful, you may get what you wished for.”
And I will be the first to say “I told you so!”
Thanks for all the hard work you did during this campaign to get the truth out. It seems like our work has just begun.
November 6, 2008 at 9:09 am
bert
“deals were made behind closed doors”
Yes, I think you are correct. And most likely between Dems and Repubs.
Below is an updated version of an article I first read late last winter titled: Karl Rove Bamboozles the Electorate…. Again.
It is long, but worth another read, especially with the updates. The fix was in early and again America is the loser.
http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html
November 6, 2008 at 9:33 am
madamab
EOF – This is great, and I will be linking to it in my post today. But your numbers are a bit off.
84% of HRC’s voters voting for Obama leaves 16% that did not vote for him. That’s not 1.7 million. 1.7 million is less than 10% of 18 million.
16% of 18 million is about 2.9 million.
Thanks once again for a great article, and for busting those myths the way you always do.
November 6, 2008 at 9:36 am
edgeoforever
madamab
Thanks – I will be correcting the numbers – math is not my strong subject! Thanks!
November 6, 2008 at 10:26 am
Grail Guardian
You have once again nailed it, Edge. All along something hasn’t smelled right. O’Reilly & Limbaugh not attacking Obama, Rove acting like he has no stake in the race, but most importantly the radical Christian right not being more outraged about Obama’s Muslim and TUCC ties. It never fit, and I think your assessment is dead on. Now we need to go back and re-examine all his other daliances across the red line this summer and figure out what other deals he cut.
November 6, 2008 at 12:09 pm
A Tale of Two Parties: Myths, Realities and Strategies in the General Election « Oooh, nuance!
[…] mentioning it on PUMA sites during the day. From EOF’s site, let’s take a look at the actual turnout numbers this year, compared to the numbers in 2004, the election between the Worst President Ever and Senator John […]
November 6, 2008 at 12:11 pm
annie
the problem was also not enough pumas. More hil voters should have stood up for themselves, and esp. more female democrats. Whatever price women pay, it is their own damn fault.
November 6, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Jean
Thanks for the ifo, edge. I’m startled. I thought the TUCC business would bring every evangelical out to vote for McCain whether they liked him or not.
November 6, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Jean
Umm, that’s “info”.
November 6, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Juanita Jenkins
Yeah, take that women! Get back in the kitchen where you belong. We must enjoy playing the little woman.
November 6, 2008 at 5:51 pm
A Tale of Two Parties: Myths, Realities and Strategies in the General Election « The Confluence
[…] mentioning it on PUMA sites during the day. From EOF’s site, let’s take a look at the actual turnout numbers this year, compared to the numbers in 2004, the election between the Worst President Ever and Senator John […]
November 6, 2008 at 7:30 pm
The Election of Obama, Abortion and Obama’s Supporters on the Religious Right | American Sentinel
[…] blog Not Your Sweetie focuses in depth on this issue presenting a statistical breakdown of voters by demographic […]
November 7, 2008 at 12:51 am
anon
I’ve been suspicious of a brokered deal between Pelosi and the Bush camp ever since the call for impeachment proceedings were dropped.
November 9, 2008 at 8:46 am
That huge turnout? Didn’t happen « Not Your Sweetie
[…] 9, 2008 · No Comments Echoing my previous findings about voter abstention by collusion, Politico is surprised to find that the much vaunted turnout was a myth Despite widespread […]
November 16, 2008 at 6:15 am
Mythical or mythological? Some truth peeks in « Not Your Sweetie
[…] was this and no “new base” for Obama or the evil Palin that detemined the outcome – plus some deals with the fundies and proposition 8 that were not mentioned here – especially in the “not so fast with the progressive” […]
November 16, 2008 at 6:54 am
edgeoforever
anon
Me too. Dean and Pelosi were almost announcing by saying to those asking for impeachment: “Let’s better concentrate on taking the White House
November 19, 2008 at 6:47 am
Roe gets another kick in the guts - will Obama do something? « Not Your Sweetie
[…] hurled insults at Palin will demand Obama takes a position on that. let’s see if he does. 6 million fundies who stayed home on election day bet he’ll let this stay. After all, Roe has been his “9.11″ over […]
December 18, 2008 at 5:17 am
Gay leaders finally smell the coffee(from under the bus) « Not Your Sweetie
[…] the little deal on Prop 8? Obama would stay nice and ambivalent on it and fundies would use his words without his objections. […]
December 19, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Obama: Dancing With The Ones That Brung Him « Oooh, nuance!
[…] see, Christians like Rick Warren are the ones that got Obama elected. A slim majority of women voted for Obama. Fewer LGBT’s voted for Obama than voted for John […]
December 19, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Obama: Dancing with the Ones That Brung Him « The Confluence
[…] see, Christians like Rick Warren are the ones that got Obama elected. A slim majority of women voted for Obama. Fewer LGBT’s voted for Obama than voted for John […]
November 4, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Tabloids and the mayoral election buy out « Not Your Sweetie
[…] not like we didn’t point out the homophobia of this crew way back. But I like the question: a woman or a gay? And which one does our White House find […]
March 22, 2010 at 7:10 am
Obama’s EO reinforces W’s conscience rules and protects RW-ers from “discrimination” « Not Your Sweetie
[…] Oh, and there was a bit of payoff to these guys for helping install him in the White House […]
March 27, 2010 at 6:20 pm
Obama’s Romenycare: a tip to faith based abstinence too « Not Your Sweetie
[…] of course we knew Obama owed the religious right from election time, but one would have thought Proposition 8 and Jane Crow EO would have settled […]
April 16, 2010 at 7:40 am
Courts be damned: Obama proclaims Day of Prayer « Not Your Sweetie
[…] was not the B0bots, but six million fundies staying home Election Day who elected Obama. Their pastors didn’t tell them to vote for a number reasons – they were paid off […]