Beneath Rick Santorum’s stunning three-state sweep on Tuesday stands another stubborn sign of dissatisfaction with the status quo: Republican turnout is down. I’m talking embarrassingly, disturbingly, hey-don’t-you-know-it’s-an-election-year bad. It is a sign of a serious enthusiasm gap among the rank and file, and a particularly bad omen for Mitt Romney and the GOP in the general election.
Here’s the tale of the tape, state by state, beginning with Tuesday night: Minnesota had just more than 47,000 people turn out for its caucuses this year — four years ago it was nearly 63,000 — and Romney came in first, not a distant third as he did Tuesday night. In Colorado, more than 70,000 people turned out for its caucus in 2008 — but in 2012 it was 65,000. And Missouri — even making a generous discount for the fact that this was an entirely symbolic contest — had 232,000 people turn out, less than half the number who did four years ago…
You reap what you sow, and part of the reason turnout is down is directly related to the problem of polarization. The Republican Party is more ideologically polarized than at any time in recent history. Therefore, it put up more purely right-wing candidates than it did four years before, when center-right leaders such as McCain and Rudy Giuliani were also in the race. A bigger tent inspired bigger turnout…
The bottom line is that voter turnout matters. And what should be most troubling for Republicans is that this enthusiasm gap among the conservative base is accompanied by a lack of candidates who might appeal to independents and centrist swing voters in the general election. It is a double barrel of bad news for the Republican Party. The numbers can be spun and rationalized by professional partisan operatives all day long, but the fact remains — voters just aren’t turning out to cast their votes for this crop of conservative candidates in 2012.
Good grief. Could CNN be onto something?
I love watching the Right stumble all over itself, it provides me no small amount of enjoyment. They will eventually have to decide what they stand for as a group, not just as a bunch of fanatic special interests searching for a Great White Hope.
The problem is not the candidates, it is the GOP: represents only the interests of the corporations, rich and bankers (the interest of the taxpayers ? ha! ), it is full of fanatic religious ideologues, and the hate for the minorities, immigrants and poor people is rampant. It is becoming obsolete.
It’s a compound metaphor:
Open Mouth.
Insert Foot.
Shoot Self in Foot.
The GOP is basically in “shoot itself in foot” mode, this time. So it can appear to be in the fight. But not to win the battle, because it doesn’t want to take charge of the mess it help create. Yet. It’s why Clinton got eight years. And Obama will get four more. The GOP isn’t ready to stop blaming him for everything that happened, before he even took office. And start taking credit for everything he fixed, after leaving office. He hasn’t fixed (or been allowed to fix) much yet. But assuming Obama wins this time. I believe the GOP will become surprisingly more cooperative, in 2013 or 2014. So they can hail what great job THEY did, in 2016’s election. Only then will they have a stooge, that everyone wants to elect. You know, another Ronald the Reagan.
BTW, you may have noticed that the GOP candidates like to mention Reagan, now and then. As if their two presidents Bush, never happened. They must be counting on the Alzheimers’ vote.
CNN is obviously pro-Obama so they aren’t willing to consider alternative explanations.
I know many Republicans and independent voters who won’t vote in primaries because either their state requires them to declare a party affiliation or they are afraid of being solicited to death for donations to the party. Nevertheless, they will show up to vote for anyone running against Obama.