Changes

Exit polls (the polling of voters as they leave voting booths) provide much data about who voted, and why.  For example, many voters felt that the economy is the most important issue, but blamed former President George W. Bush rather than President Obama for the bad economy today!

Exit polls (the polling of voters as they leave voting booths) provide much data about who voted, and why.  For example, many voters felt that the economy is the most important issue, but blamed former President George W. Bush rather than President Obama for the bad economy today!

The most telling data about the election is this:  "18-29 year olds made up 19 percent of voters, 6 points higher than Gallup’s estimate"<ref>http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2012/11/07/galluping-away-from-the-herd/</ref> and Obama won by 60-37% among this demographic, even though Kerry won it by only few percentage points over GWB in 2004.  The reference in the quotation to "Gallup's estimate" is about the Gallup poll, which predicted on Election Day that Romney would win by 49-48%, when in fact Obama won by 50-48%.

The most telling data about the election is this:  "18-29 year olds made up 19 percent of voters, 6 points higher than Gallup’s estimate"<ref>http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2012/11/07/galluping-away-from-the-herd/</ref> and Obama won by 60-36% among this demographic, even though Kerry won it by only few percentage points over GWB in 2004.  The reference in the quotation to "Gallup's estimate" is about the Gallup poll, which predicted on Election Day that Romney would win by 49-48%, when in fact Obama won by 50-48%.

This tipped the election in Obama's favor.  In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia, "if Governor Romney had won half of the youth vote, or if young voters had stayed home entirely, then Romney would have won instead of Obama. Those states represent 80 electoral votes, sufficient to have made Romney the next president."<ref name="Youth Vote">http://www.civicyouth.org/at-least-80-electoral-votes-depended-on-youth/</ref>

This tipped the election in Obama's favor.  In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia, "if Governor Romney had won half of the youth vote, or if young voters had stayed home entirely, then Romney would have won instead of Obama. Those states represent 80 electoral votes, sufficient to have made Romney the next president."<ref name="Youth Vote">http://www.civicyouth.org/at-least-80-electoral-votes-depended-on-youth/</ref>

The puzzle is this:  '''''why''''' did a large majority of young voters (age 18-29) vote for Obama, and why in numbers larger than expected?  The most plausible explanation can be summed up in two words: "ground game."  We learned about that in a prior lecture, and it worth revisiting next.

The puzzle is this:  '''''why''''' did a large majority of young voters (age 18-29) vote for Obama, and why in numbers greater than expected?  The most plausible explanation can be summed up in two words: "ground game."  We learned about that in a prior lecture, and it is worth revisiting now.

=== Ground Game ===

=== Ground Game ===

Today nearly half of Americans vote early, before Election Day.  In Ohio there was a full month during which people voted.  The term "ground game" is better in describing what the political parties do each day for a full month during early voting to get people likely to vote for their side to cast their vote early.

Today nearly half of Americans vote early, before Election Day.  In Ohio there was a full month during which people voted.  The term "ground game" is better in describing what the political parties do each day for a full month during early voting to get people likely to vote for their side to cast their vote early.

Hundreds of thousands of people voted by mail during the early voting period, for example, and the "ground game" in many states included getting mail-in ballots to people and making sure they sent them in.  In some states, depending on its election rules (which vary from state to state), one person can push hundreds of people to vote during the early voting period.  That is what the "ground game" means, and the better the technology and data that a political party has about its supporters, the more effective it can be in increasing its votes during early voting.

Millions of people voted by mail during the early voting period, for example, and the "ground game" in many states included getting mail-in ballots to people and making sure they sent them in.  In some states, depending on its election rules (which vary from state to state), one person can push hundreds of people to vote during the early voting period.  That is what the "ground game" means, and the better the technology and data that a political party has about its supporters, the more effective it can be in increasing its votes during early voting.

The Democrats had a much better "ground game" than the Republicans did in this election, and that is the likely reason that a larger-than-expected number of 18-29 year-olds voted, and voted for Obama by a large percentage.  College students are in this age group, and the ground game works particularly well on college campuses.  Democrat workers call and visit college students to get them to mail in their votes, or go to polling booths.  The longer the early voting period is, the more this can be done.  Obama himself voted early in October to promote this among his supporters.  In the key swing state of Ohio, nearly 2 million people voted early, and the vast majority were Democrats.  Obama won the state by only 100,000 votes.  If Romney had a better ground game, or if there was no early voting, then Romney would have won.

The Democrats had a much better ground game than the Republicans did in this election, and that is the likely reason that a larger-than-expected number of 18-29 year-olds voted, and voted for Obama by a large percentage.  College students are in this age group, and the ground game works particularly well on college campuses.  Democrat workers call and visit college students to get them to mail in their votes, or go to polling booths.  The longer the early voting period is, the more this can be done.  Obama himself voted early in October to promote this among his supporters.  In the key swing state of Ohio, nearly 2 million people voted early, and the vast majority were Democrats.  Obama won the state by only 100,000 votes.  If Romney had a better ground game, or if there was no early voting, then Romney would have won.

Six billion dollars were spent on this election cycle, which included $2-3 billion spent on the presidential race, so there was plenty of money available to gather data about voters and pay workers to have a good ground game.  But it seems that Romney's campaign did not recognize the significance of this.  Reports after the election confirmed that Romney's ground game was far weaker than Obama's:<ref>http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/nov/8/obama-ground-game-wont-transfer-2016-aide-says/#ixzz2Bsldq5kV</ref>

Six billion dollars were spent on this election cycle, which included $2-3 billion spent on the presidential race, so there was plenty of money available to gather data about voters and pay workers to have a good ground game.  But it seems that Romney's campaign did not recognize the significance of this.  Reports after the election confirmed that Romney's ground game was far weaker than Obama's:<ref>http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/nov/8/obama-ground-game-wont-transfer-2016-aide-says/#ixzz2Bsldq5kV</ref>

Indiana, the state just west of Ohio, was not a swing state and it was known that Obama had no chance of winning it.  So neither Obama nor Romney spent any money on a ground game there.  As a result, Obama's lead among the young people who voted was much less.  Romney actually won the vote in the area of Purdue University, which has many young voters.<ref name="Youth Vote"/>

Indiana, the state just west of Ohio, was not a swing state and it was known that Obama had no chance of winning it.  So neither Obama nor Romney spent any money on a ground game there.  As a result, Obama's lead among the young people who voted was much less.  Romney actually won the vote in the area of Purdue University, which has many young voters.<ref name="Youth Vote"/>

Mitt Romney's campaign underestimated the significance of the ground game in Ohio, which was the key state.  Obama's campaign had nearly 100 more neighborhood offices in Ohio than Romney's campaign did.  Before the election, Romney's campaign staffers even dismissed the significance of that imbalance.  But afterward it was clear that is what defeated Romney.  Turnout by African Americans in 2008 to vote for Obama was very high, totaling 11% of the electorate in Ohio.  But with the Democrats' better ground game, they increased that turnout further in 2012, to where African American voters for Obama totaled 15% of all Ohio voters.  This illustrated the famous aphorism:  "all politics is local."  Romney was beaten by Obama's superior ground game in Ohio and other key states.

Mitt Romney's campaign underestimated the significance of the ground game in Ohio, which was the key state.  Obama's campaign had nearly 100 more neighborhood offices in Ohio than Romney's campaign did.  Before the election, Romney's campaign staffers even dismissed the significance of that imbalance.  But afterward it was clear this is what defeated Romney.  Turnout by African Americans in 2008 to vote for Obama was very high, totaling 11% of the electorate in Ohio.  But with the Democrats' better ground game, they increased that turnout further in 2012, to where African American voters for Obama totaled 15% of all Ohio voters.  This illustrated the famous aphorism:  "all politics is local."  Romney was beaten by Obama's superior ground game in Ohio and other key states.

The bottom line is this:  it is no longer enough to win for someone to merely be sure to vote himself.  To save our Nation, it is essential that concerned citizens themselves vote AND repeatedly ask many other like-minded people to vote too.  If, for example, each pro-lifer repeatedly asked ten other like-minded persons to vote and followed up with them to confirm that they did vote, then a complete ban on federally-funded abortion could be enacted.<ref>The [[Hyde Amendment]] is a partial ban on federal funding of abortions.</ref>

The bottom line is this:  it is no longer enough to win for someone to merely be sure to vote himself.  To save our Nation, it is essential that concerned citizens themselves vote AND repeatedly ask many other like-minded people to vote too.  If, for example, each pro-lifer repeatedly asked ten other like-minded persons to vote and followed up with them to confirm that they did vote, then a ban on federally-funded abortion would probably be enacted.<ref>The [[Hyde Amendment]] is a only partial ban on federal funding of abortions.</ref>

=== Other Reasons for Romney's Loss ===

=== Other Reasons for Romney's Loss ===

There are other reasons, both in campaign tactics and in substance, which might explain Romney's loss.  Indeed, most students in this class predicted weeks ago that Romney would lose, even though Romney was ahead in the polls during periods in October.

There are other reasons, both in campaign tactics and in substance, which might explain Romney's loss.  Indeed, most students in this class predicted weeks ago that Romney would lose, even though Romney was ahead in the polls to times in October.

One possible reason for Romney losing was how he handled the important final debate.  He intentionally appeared friendlier and more conciliatory in his attempt to win support of more women voters, and indicated that he agreed with Obama on several positions.  Obama's approval rating then improved and most people thought he won the debate, because even his sharpest critic (Romney) seemed in agreement with him.  The slight improvement in Obama's approval rating, from about 48% to 50%, may have meant the difference between Romney winning or losing.  Obama received a vote total of 50%, exactly the same as his approval rating.  Had Obama's rating stayed at 48%, then his final vote total may have been only 48%, and he may have lost.  This was an illustration of why a political candidate should not agree with the incumbent he is trying to defeat.

One possible reason for Romney losing was how he handled the important final debate.  He intentionally appeared friendlier and more conciliatory in his attempt to win support of more women voters, and indicated that he agreed with Obama on several positions.  Obama's approval rating then improved and most people thought he won the debate, because even his sharpest critic (Romney) seemed in agreement with him.  The slight improvement in Obama's approval rating, from about 48% to 50%, may have meant the difference between Romney winning or losing.  Obama received a vote total of 50%, exactly the same as his approval rating.  Had Obama's rating stayed at 48%, then his final vote total may have been only 48%, and he may have lost.  This was an illustration of why a political candidate should not agree with the incumbent he is trying to defeat.

Others cite some of the positions taken by Romney and Obama during the campaign.  Hispanics voted in favor of Obama in large percentages (71-27%), much larger than Democrats received in the past, and some have attributed that to the Republican position against amnesty for illegal aliens who came here from Mexico.

Others cite some of the positions taken by Romney and Obama during the campaign.  Hispanics voted in favor of Obama in large percentages (71-27%), much larger than Democrats received in the past, and some have attributed that to the Republican position against amnesty for illegal aliens who came here from Mexico.

As to how young voters aged 18-29 favored Obama by a 60-36% margin, some point out that a record number of young people have no religion.  They do not read the Bible, and they do not attend church.  As the numbers of non-religious and even atheists grow among the youth, the support for the Democrats is going to increase.  Some observe that the exclusion of Christianity from public schools, which teaches 90% of teenagers, is starting to have a growing negative effect on election outcomes.  The only solution to that trend is for there to be more evangelism among the younger people in America.  Remember that the strongest correlation to how someone votes is how often he goes to church; Romney won by a margin of 59-39% among those who attend church at least once a week.

As to how young voters aged 18-29 favored Obama by a 60-36% margin, some point out that a record number of young people have no religion.  They do not read the Bible, and they do not attend church.  As the numbers of non-religious and even atheists grow among the youth, the support for the Democrats is going to increase.  Some observe that the exclusion of Christianity from public schools, which teaches 90% of teenagers, is starting to have a growing negative effect on election outcomes.  One solution to that trend is for there to be more evangelism among the younger people in America.  Remember that the strongest correlation to how someone votes is how often he goes to church; Romney won by a margin of 59-39% among those who attend church at least once a week.

Others observe that the slick campaign slogan by Democrats, accusing Republicans of a (mythical) "War on Women," may have helped Obama win by a record 55-44% among women voters.  Romney won by a substantial percentage among men voters, but more women vote than men do.  Many women, however, dislike war, and Romney seemed more hawkish than Obama.  Also, women are most concerned by how public schools are failing, but Obama said more about education than Romney did.

Others observe that the slick campaign slogan by Democrats, accusing Republicans of a (mythical) "War on Women," may have helped Obama win by a record 55-44% among women voters.  Romney won by a substantial percentage among men voters, but more women vote than men do.  Many women, however, dislike war, and Romney seemed more hawkish than Obama.  Also, women are most concerned by how public schools are failing, and Obama said more about education than Romney did.

Ultimately there is the simple likability issue that many students in this course cited about a month ago.  Voters, particularly the youth, Hispanics and women, never liked Romney much.  Unlikable candidates usually do lose.

Ultimately there is the simple likability issue that many students in this course cited about a month ago.  Voters, particularly the youth, Hispanics and women, never liked Romney much.  Unlikable candidates usually do lose.

9. What is a "recall", and which types of officials are susceptible to it?  Would you interpret U.S. Constitution as preventing the people of New Jersey from recalling a U.S. Senator?  Discuss.

9. What is a "recall", and which types of officials are susceptible to it?  Would you interpret U.S. Constitution as preventing the people of New Jersey from recalling a U.S. Senator?  Discuss.

<br>10. Do you think Romney could have won if he had taken emphasized or taken different positions, or handled the third debate differently?  Discuss.

<br>10. Do you think Romney could have won if he had taken or emphasized different positions, or handled the third debate differently?  Discuss.

<br>11. Explain the two different types of referenda, and whether you like one better than the other.

<br>11. Explain the two different types of referenda, and whether you like one better than the other.

<br>12.  What is your view of the New Jersey college bond referendum that passed, which increased debt by $750 million based on a promise of improving state universities?

<br>12.  What is your view of the New Jersey college bond referendum that passed, which increased debt by $750 million based on a promise of improving state universities?