That they happened to break more for Obama doesn't show that Obama targeted them - that's getting the inference backward.
If you wanted to understand who Obama targeted and whether that targeting does or doesn't point to a demographic problem for the GOP, you'd have to look at the respective percentages of eligible voters vs. actual voters of each demographic and how they actually voted - historically, and relative to one another. Do you have any relevant data to that end?
We know that these groups came out more for Obama than they have historically. Whether that's the new normal, again, we can't know for a while.
You keep citing Obama's legendary GOTV machine, but this remains nothing but a lazy hand-wave until you cite some evidence.
And if there were truly a "rightward shift" going on, the Republicans would hold the White House and safe majorities in Congress. See how easy this is?
Not really. Moving to the right does not mean we've moved far enough to overcome, say, a good GOTV effort! Romney failed to exploit what was achieved in 2010, failed to achieve what was achieved in Wisconsin in 2012.
The people who are saying that the Republicans have a demographic issue are just looking at how the numbers among the demographics are splitting.
Yes. It assumes they'll never come on board, that the demographics are automatically an issue, and have no data other than simply "there are X number of Y group that doesn't support Republicans growing at Z." Bush got 40% of the Latino vote in 2004. There's no demographic bomb, it's a turnout bomb.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 11/11/12 01:45 (UTC)If you wanted to understand who Obama targeted and whether that targeting does or doesn't point to a demographic problem for the GOP, you'd have to look at the respective percentages of eligible voters vs. actual voters of each demographic and how they actually voted - historically, and relative to one another. Do you have any relevant data to that end?
We know that these groups came out more for Obama than they have historically. Whether that's the new normal, again, we can't know for a while.
You keep citing Obama's legendary GOTV machine, but this remains nothing but a lazy hand-wave until you cite some evidence.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/07/tech/web/obama-campaign-tech-team/index.html
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/11/07/turnout-and-organization-were-key-to-obama-victory/1688537/
http://www.gq.com/news-politics/blogs/death-race/2012/10/president-obama-appears-under-the.html
http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/07/inside-the-secret-world-of-quants-and-data-crunchers-who-helped-obama-win/
And if there were truly a "rightward shift" going on, the Republicans would hold the White House and safe majorities in Congress. See how easy this is?
Not really. Moving to the right does not mean we've moved far enough to overcome, say, a good GOTV effort! Romney failed to exploit what was achieved in 2010, failed to achieve what was achieved in Wisconsin in 2012.
The people who are saying that the Republicans have a demographic issue are just looking at how the numbers among the demographics are splitting.
Yes. It assumes they'll never come on board, that the demographics are automatically an issue, and have no data other than simply "there are X number of Y group that doesn't support Republicans growing at Z." Bush got 40% of the Latino vote in 2004. There's no demographic bomb, it's a turnout bomb.