Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't lump them together, as I cannot tell why they fail to vote off years. I wish turnout was far higher than POTUS every single election. But I accept no feel good excuse which is all low info voter is..an excuse.
FYI: Long-term, I've voted for more Repubs than Dems, but I refuse to register with a party, as I have no allegiance to anything beyond nation, state, and community. I'd prefer elections without parties at all.just candidates. (I have avoided the GOP most during the TP era.) I'm actually both a Dole and old McCain (pre 2008)era..if he stayed true to JM and paired with Lieberman, that would have been an ideal ticket in my view!
Bobtn, I sincerely apologize if I was rude to you, but I am curious as to your opinion (or anybody else's for that matter) as to why many voters don't show up in non-presidential election years. I am certainly not trying to be snarky or anything; I really would like to read your insights on the matter.
I know that this an insulting thing to say, but I honestly do believe that those who only vote in presidential elections are either too lazy or lack the intellectual ability to realize that the non-presidential races are also highly important. It would be a lie for me to say otherwise.
How convenient for some to term better turnout low information..just because those voting just POTUS years dislike their message.
I'd like to see the GOP do as they once did, and appeal to moderates, and swing state voters, including those who are NOT simply white and male. It isn't hard, but it requires a moderate message and messenger..from the very beginning of the process right through actually governing.
The GOP base is the #1 reason Team Blue starts with such a big EC edge. Blue's base is not forcing the candidates to adapt to extreme positions, away from moderate America. Red's base is doing that.
the GOP has split 2-2 with the Democrats the last 4 presidential elections. They have the house and senate and majority of the governorships and states legislatures.
explain to me how the GOP as adapted "extreme" positions?
is not the GOP that plays the race card and class warfare and gender warfare, its the democrat party but I guess you don't call that extreme tactics or extreme positions.
I wouldn't hazard a guess as to why they show just POTUS, although many local pols (both parties) do tend to act as idiots, so maybe we should mock them for low turnout issues. I moved from Tn, but my town had a 3 term mayor I knew, who did some awfully stupid things, which almost cost us financially. If we had been larger, it would have merited mocking for how crazy some of his moves were. I voted, but even I found off year voting to be picking the "most sane" from terrible options.
Hellion199, Not supporting any Immigration Reform with a path to citizenship is extreme. It's just for looks they fail to support it for. we're not marching 11 million out (LOL).
Not recognizing Roe v Wade made pro-life v pro-choice positions simply a means to divide is luny. Again, that pro-life support and a thrashing 67-31% by single women. Connect the dots already.
Hellion199, Not supporting any Immigration Reform with a path to citizenship is extreme. It's just for looks they fail to support it for. we're not marching 11 million out (LOL).
Not recognizing Roe v Wade made pro-life v pro-choice positions simply a means to divide is luny. Again, that pro-life support and a thrashing 67-31% by single women. Connect the dots already.
not supporting amnesty and for securing the boarding is not EXTREME. Most Americans support that.
we are not marching 11 million out but we are not welcoming another 11 million and reward lawbreakers with amnesty......either the rule of law means something or it doesn't. You call that extreme, I call it mainstream to defend and enforce our laws.
you mean that abortions should be legal but rare and not be funded by tax dollars and should be regulated
by the states extreme????? lol
Many find abortions on demand with no limitations using tax dollars extreme.
by the way, the President can't do anything about immigration or Abortions.....so if that's the reason people are voting for democrats in Presidential elections then they are clueless and are low information voters.
My sole issue w/abortion is public funding. I simply wish the GOP would not even bring it up..EVER.
Talking is not changing squat, but 67-31 thrashings cannot be afforded. It's a divisive issue that should be avoided like a subway's 3rd rail.
you never talk about divisive issues from the democrats from playing the race card, gender card and class warfare to divide the country...you only bring the "extreme" views from the GOP on abortions and immigration....why is that?
With the Blue Wall starting Dems off with a 70 EC lead (approx.), those issues you mention they have do not seem to be giving them issues regarding ability to win. The GOP cannot say the same thing.
In 24 years, More than 61% of all electoral votes have gone to Team Blue.
Talking about the Dems issues would be like talking about what the Seahawks did wrong tonight..after they won, while ignoring Carolina's errors.
PS: having a smaller wall means not being able to lose ANY state not part of a base. Having a larger wall means flexibility to cherry-pick which swing states you need. Its basic math, counting to 270.
With the Blue Wall starting Dems off with a 70 EC lead (approx.), those issues you mention they have do not seem to be giving them issues regarding ability to win. The GOP cannot say the same thing.
In 24 years, More than 61% of all electoral votes have gone to Team Blue.
Talking about the Dems issues would be like talking about what the Seahawks did wrong tonight..after they won, while ignoring Carolina's errors.
PS: having a smaller wall means not being able to lose ANY state not part of a base. Having a larger wall means flexibility to cherry-pick which swing states you need. Its basic math, counting to 270.
you ignore the fact that the GOP have split 2-2 with the Democrats in the last 4 presidential elections. They control the house, senate, the majority of governorships and majority of state's legislatures.
I don't think they have to change much their platform. i think they are in better position than democrats.
what matters is wins not by how much you won the electorate college: since 1968 to present , the Republicans have won the presidential election 7 times to Democrats 5 times.....in the last 4 presidential elections they have split 2-2.
Americans will not let 1 party control the WH too long, they have been very consistent on that for last 100 years. No party has won the WH 3 times in a row for close to 30 years. There is a reason for that.
In 2000 and 2004, GOP won with 271 and 286 ECs and 44% Latino share. 17% of the 44% went bye-bye and not passing Reform w/pathway to citizenship is not likely to woo them back.
Add in NOVA has had explosive growth since those 2 wins, and Va went blue. Va was part of the 271 and 286, and NOVA isn't going to shrink.
America's consistency happened before HUGE demographic shifts. It may not have happened with such shifts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
