Pages

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

2012 POTUS Election Exit Poll

I leave it to the reader to draw his/her own conclusions from the below Sailer-produced graphic:


Some interesting observations/conclusions:

- Catholics went 13% more for a candidate not shy about forcing Catholic institutions to pay for abortifacient contraception

- Some mileage may be gained by restricting suffrage to married Americans who don't receive a net payout from the Federal government

- Property owners--those having "skin in the game"--appear to be the most trustworthy wrt freedom and liberty.  Same as they were in the 18th century. Imagine that.

- Identity politics appears to be the name of the game in multi-racial, Marxist America

Discuss amongst yourselves.

5 comments:

Christina said...

I can understand why the vote was extended to people without property... I mean, if people WANT to be able to get property, keeping the vote in the hands of people who may want to just get themselves more property just doesn't sound like a good plan (cronyism?)

Can I just say something really stupid, idealistic, and naive right now? I just wish everyone wanted to do the right thing =p

Ok - done with the sap.

I wonder how long its going to take the GOP to abandon their core values to try and get those blue votes? Do you think that might actually give a 3rd party a shot and may actually spell the demise of the GOP? Finally kick those bastards out of Washington once and for all?

In a way, I say lets try and push them to that end faster... but at the same time, I'm reminded of what happened in the Episcopal church when a group of conservative bishops decided the church needed to destroy the ECU because they were supporting gay marriage. They voted a woman for arch-bishop trying to force the conservatives' hands. Instead of leading to a reformation of the church, half its churches broke from the church leaving a bunch of fractured churches floating in the abyss of non-ecclesiastical worship (something none of them actually want).

Hey! On the good side of governmental collapse, though - reformations and revolutions always go hand in hand! We could do with a Great Awakening, don't you think?

Nova said...

The Catholic vote is actually very split between Hispanic and non-Hispanic Catholics. The Hispanic Catholics went 76/23 for Obama, while white Catholics went 56/43 Romney -- a 20 point differential! What we're seeing in the country as a whole is more impactful in the Catholic vote because most Hispanics are Catholic and so they have a bigger % of that vote and can swing it. And, no, Hispanic Catholics don't vote based on social issues, they vote based on government largesse, just like they do in Latin American countries. This is why it's just plain stupid for Republicans to think going soft on immigration is going to win them an audience with Hispanics -- all it will do will create more Hispanic democratic voters who will vote democrat because they want handouts, just like they voted back home.

See: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/08/us-usa-campaign-religion-idUSBRE8A71M420121108

ray said...

as you advise, more "nibbling around the edges" will be enough to solve america's problems

a few political adjustments, four more years of clever analyses, working on reforming those "laws" . . . yes, everything will be fine

the system is basically solid, continue to trust in it

Elusive Wapiti said...

"I wonder how long its going to take the GOP to abandon their core values to try and get those blue votes? "

The GOP has arguably already done this. "Compassionate conservatism", Hispandering, identity politics (picking female and black candidates as a way to "prove" they're not raciss), big government conservatism are all ways in which the GOP has tried to shave off a piece of the blue vote. Trouble is that trying to out-dem Dems is a losing proposition from the start.

"Instead of leading to a reformation of the church,"

Not Episcopalian, so no dog in the fight. But perhaps the bishops concluded that it was better to cut off the arm that offended them rather than drag around a rotting appendage. Perhaps also they concluded that the liberal faction within the ECU was so far off the reservation, so stalwart in their liberalist beliefs, so thoroughgoingly infected that it wasn't worth the attempt.

Elusive Wapiti said...

"This is why it's just plain stupid for Republicans to think going soft on immigration is going to win them an audience with Hispanics"

Agreed Nova. People are attracted to doing the right thing. The right thing in this case--right for Hispanics too, at least the legal ones--is to enforce the immigration laws vigorously. Hispandering to shave off a couple of votes is as craven as it is transparent.