Believe it
or not, I really am going to go beyond what must appear to be my inexplicable
fascination with the kudzu of a phenomenon that is D.J. Trump and his seemingly
Svengali-like master mining and domination of Republican Party Presidential
politics. Honest. But not before I take one more peek behind
the curtain at the new and improved Wizard...and this is not of Oz, if you know
what I mean.
Things
became so bad that last week Mitt Romney delivered a planned (pre-released to
the media) statement under the general heading of Trump is a fraud, annotated
with a host of historical facts and implications referencing the Donald's
failed enterprises, his bait and switch initiative that appears tailor-made to
hoodwink a gullible American electorate, and of course a notion that has
emerged as a staple if not favorite GOP Establishment go-to chorus, Donald
Trump is not a conservative.
Pause. Stop laughing. Cease rolling around on the floor. Pick my azz up and get back to my keyboard.
On its face, this may not equate to Reefer Madness, but it is some of the
funniest schiznit I have heard in...well, forever.
Why is that
you may ask. There are too many reasons
to articulate in this post alone, but I'll share enough for you to get the
general point.
Oh my, where
do I begin? Let me start with the
end. Consider that Willard
"Mitt" Romney took to a podium in the official capacity of GOP
(Establishment) Spokesman. Say what?
All things
considered, that in and of itself is one heck-of-a mouthful. Considering Mitt was the architect of the
GOP's last failed attempt to wrest the White House away from those
"dastardly" Democrats, doubling down, even to seek advice and counsel
from him seems more than a little odd.
Perhaps the only thing imaginable that would be stranger, not to add
funnier, and borderline pathetic, would be for Mitt to have delivered his
statement jointly with John McCain, President Obama's other vanquished
foe. But I digress.
Now back to
Mitt, the emerging Elder Statesman of the Grand Old Party. The candidate of 47%, of Bundles of women, of
Corporations are people, of Romneycare (that was Obamacare...before Obamacare),
and most notably the candidate who lost a plethora of critical voting
demographics; so many that his loss to President Obama was virtually signed,
sealed, and delivered. How bad was Mr.
Romney's showing? It was so bad that
Team GOP conducted a post election audit, and in doing so found that the Party
needed to fundamentally re-invent its approach to Presidential election
politics.
As we enter
the sunset of the Obama era Presidency, it is worth revisiting the areas in
which President Obama bested business mogul and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt
Romney.
2012 Presidential vote by
demographic subgroup
|
|||||||
Demographic subgroup
|
Obama
|
Romney
|
Other
|
% of
total vote
|
|||
Total vote
|
51
|
47
|
2
|
100
|
|||
Ideology
|
|||||||
86
|
11
|
3
|
25
|
||||
56
|
41
|
3
|
41
|
||||
17
|
82
|
1
|
35
|
||||
Party
|
|||||||
92
|
7
|
1
|
38
|
||||
6
|
93
|
1
|
32
|
||||
45
|
50
|
5
|
29
|
||||
Gender
|
|||||||
Men
|
45
|
52
|
3
|
47
|
|||
Women
|
55
|
44
|
1
|
53
|
|||
Gender by marital status
|
|||||||
Married men
|
38
|
60
|
2
|
29
|
|||
Married women
|
46
|
53
|
1
|
31
|
|||
Non-married men
|
56
|
40
|
4
|
18
|
|||
Non-married women
|
67
|
31
|
2
|
23
|
|||
Race/ethnicity
|
|||||||
39
|
59
|
2
|
72
|
||||
93
|
6
|
1
|
13
|
||||
73
|
26
|
1
|
3
|
||||
Other
|
58
|
38
|
4
|
2
|
|||
71
|
27
|
2
|
10
|
||||
Religion
|
|||||||
43
|
56
|
1
|
51
|
||||
50
|
48
|
2
|
25
|
||||
21
|
78
|
1
|
2
|
||||
69
|
30
|
1
|
2
|
||||
Other
|
74
|
23
|
3
|
7
|
|||
70
|
26
|
4
|
12
|
||||
Religious service attendance
|
|||||||
More than once a week
|
36
|
63
|
1
|
14
|
|||
Once a week
|
41
|
58
|
1
|
28
|
|||
A few times a month
|
55
|
44
|
1
|
13
|
|||
A few times a year
|
56
|
42
|
2
|
27
|
|||
Never
|
62
|
34
|
4
|
17
|
|||
White evangelical or born-again
Christian?
|
|||||||
21
|
78
|
1
|
26
|
||||
Everyone else
|
60
|
37
|
3
|
74
|
|||
Age
|
|||||||
18–24 years old
|
60
|
36
|
4
|
11
|
|||
25–29 years old
|
60
|
38
|
2
|
8
|
|||
30–39 years old
|
55
|
42
|
3
|
17
|
|||
40–49 years old
|
48
|
50
|
2
|
20
|
|||
50–64 years old
|
47
|
52
|
1
|
28
|
|||
65 and older
|
44
|
56
|
0
|
16
|
|||
Sexual orientation
|
|||||||
76
|
22
|
2
|
5
|
||||
49
|
49
|
2
|
95
|
||||
Education
|
|||||||
Not a high school
graduate
|
64
|
35
|
1
|
3
|
|||
High school graduate
|
51
|
48
|
1
|
21
|
|||
Some college
education
|
49
|
48
|
3
|
29
|
|||
College graduate
|
47
|
51
|
2
|
29
|
|||
55
|
42
|
3
|
18
|
||||
Family income
|
|||||||
Under $30,000
|
63
|
35
|
2
|
20
|
|||
$30,000–49,999
|
57
|
42
|
1
|
21
|
|||
$50,000–99,999
|
46
|
52
|
2
|
31
|
|||
$100,000–199,999
|
44
|
54
|
2
|
21
|
|||
$200,000–249,999
|
47
|
52
|
1
|
3
|
|||
Over $250,000
|
42
|
55
|
3
|
4
|
|||
Region
|
|||||||
59
|
39
|
2
|
21
|
||||
51
|
47
|
2
|
24
|
||||
44
|
54
|
2
|
34
|
||||
54
|
43
|
3
|
21
|
||||
Community size
|
|||||||
Big cities (population over
500,000)
|
69
|
29
|
2
|
11
|
|||
Mid-sized cities (population
50,000 to 500,000)
|
58
|
40
|
2
|
21
|
|||
Suburbs
|
48
|
50
|
2
|
47
|
|||
Towns (population 10,000 to
50,000)
|
42
|
56
|
2
|
8
|
|||
Rural areas
|
37
|
61
|
2
|
14
|
|||
Source: Exit polls conducted by Edison Research of Somerville, New
Jersey, for the National Election Pool, a consortium of ABC News,
Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, Fox News,[139] and NBC News.[140] Total vote and results by region are based on the "Votes by
state" section of this article.
Taking a look at the categories
above, let’s zero in on a number of specific categories:
Total
Vote – Obama 51% Romney – 47
Liberals
– Obama 86% Romney – 11
Moderates
– Obama 56% Romney – 41
Democrats
– Obama 93% Romney – 7%
Women
– Obama 55% Romney – 44%
Non-Married
Men – Obama 56% Romney – 40%
Non-Married
Women – Obama 67% Romney – 31%
Black
– Obama 93% Romney – 6%
Asian
– Obama 73% Romney – 26%
Hispanic
– Obama 71% Romney – 27%
Other
– Obama 58% Romney – 38%
Catholic
– Obama 50% Romney – 48%
Jewish
– Obama 69% Romney
– 30%
Other
Religion – Obama 74% Romney – 23%
No
Religion – Obama 70% Romney – 26%
Few
Times/Month – Obama 55% Romney – 44%
Few
Times/Year – Obama 56% Romney – 42%
Never
– Obama 62% Romney – 34%
Non-White
Evangel. – Obama 60% Romney – 37%
18-24
Years Old – Obama 60% Romney – 36%
25-29
Years Old – Obama 60% Romney – 38%
30-39
Years Old – Obama 55% Romney – 42%
Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual
– Obama 76% Romney – 22%
Heterosexual
– Obama 49% Romney – 49%
Non
High School Grads – Obama 64% Romney – 35%
High
School Graduate – Obama 51% Romney – 48%
Some
College Education – Obama 49% Romney – 48%
Postgraduate
Education – Obama – 55% Romney – 42%
Under
$30,000 – Obama 63% Romney
– 35%
30K
- $49,999 – Obama 57% Romney – 42%
Northeast
– Obama 59% Romney – 39%
Midwest
– Obama 51% Romney – 47%
West
– Obama 54% Romney – 43%
Big
Cities (500K+) – Obama 69% Romney – 29%
Mid-Sized
Cities (50K to 500K) – Obama 58% Romney
– 40%
Keep in mind this (2012) was a Presidential
Election in which Mr. Romney endeavored to paint the Obama economy as
trenchantly slow to improve, to frame the Affordable Care Act (Romneycare
before it was Obamacare) as failed and costly government intervention, to
characterize American Foreign Policy as feckless and ineffective, to describe the
administration’s immigration policy as both costly and pandering, to suggest the
President’s Same-sex marriage initiative as a tack that would destroy the
American Culture, and to propose eliminating the minimum wage (which President
Obama campaigned to increase). There
were other issues of note, to be sure, but those items above include a litany
of items that Team Romney attempted to use as a club with which to batter the
Obama Administration/Campaign on a daily basis.
It didn’t work; hence the Republican National Committee’s audit and
recommendations to reinvent itself ahead of the 2016 Election.
To cast Mitt Romney in the role
of the long arm of the GOP law, tasked with brandishing his Light Saber and
coming to the rescue in order to rid the political Galaxy of the Darth Vader
that is Trump, no matter your political affiliation or ideology, that is just
bordering on the jagged edges of sheer disbelief. Yet, that is the space in which the GOP Establishment
finds itself, for all practical purposes, desperate for the Establishment
Empire to Strike Back.
Despite the perceived strange
nature of the individual selected to deliver the message, there is evidence
that the effort has some degree of resonance.
Of the four states up for grabs in GOP balloting this past weekend, Ted
Cruz bagged Kansas and Maine, while Donald Trump claimed Louisiana and
Kentucky. Both declared victory, and in
fact, were winners, of sorts. Cruz was
able to continue claiming he is the only candidate poised to trumpTrump, while Trump continued to amass delegates and hold on to his
overall lead (as Rubio and Kasich trail badly, and Carson has conceded he sees no path forward).
Last night, the battle
continued. Mississippi, Michigan, and
Idaho voted yesterday. At the time this
post was released, Trump had secured victories in Mississippi and Michigan;
Idaho went to Ted Cruz. Rubio, and Kasich (in that order) trailed.
So to summarize the theme of the
day, dismiss the all the protest messaging of the GOP that suggests that
everything is OK. The Party may not be
in disarray; that’s true. But there is
every reason to believe, based upon ample evidence, the panic button has been
pressed. Any argument to the contrary is
pure unadulterated wishful thinking…or worse…read that falsifying the
facts. The bottom line here is the Party
handlers and message makers do not want Donald Trump to represent the GOP in
this fall’s general election. At this
point, that is exactly what at least a plurality of those voting are making
perfectly clear, more often than not. To
wit, what we are witnessing is, “The (GOP) Empire Strikes Back,or...Developing a Systematic, if Late-to-the-Party, Strategy to Contain DonaldJ. Trump!”
I’m done; holla back!
Find a new post
each Wednesday.
To subscribe,
click on Follow in the bottom right hand corner of my Home
Page at http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com; enter your e-mail address in
the designated space, and click on “Sign me up.” Subsequent
editions of “Break It Down” will be mailed to your in-box.
Consult the links below for more
detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post:
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment