This week we are starting to look at political behavior, which includes many of the ways that citizens actively or passively interact with their government. The most obvious form of political participation is voting, although, as you will read, it is far from the only form of participation
First let's look at how the overall voter turnout in 2008 compares to other presidential elections since 1948. I suggest reading along the side to understand the difference between the Voting Age Population (VAP), and the Voting Eligible Population (VEP). You can get more detailed state by state information at the bottom of that page or by clicking here, Can you guess which state had the highest voter turnout?
Next lets look at how various groups across the nation voted. The most accurate measures of this come from exit polls taken from people who just left the voting booth. Some different looks at this are available here, or here.
Finally let's take a look at the voting turnout and breakdown in 2012 to see what changed since 2008 and what has stayed the same.
After looking at this information what do you think it suggests about what people were looking for in November 2012? Do you think that the government is responding to the goals, wishes, or needs of the people today?
After looking through the various polls and statistics I was not surprised in the least bit. The supporters for Obama and the supporters for the Republican party in both 2008 and 2012 are your stereotypical Democratic and Republican party members.
ReplyDeleteSince the economy was a huge issue in the November 2012 election and Obama obviously won, I found it telling that 60% of those people who made under $50K voted for Obama also believed that the economy was better today than it was 4 years ago. Obama is more concerned with the benefits of the lower/middle class than the upper class therefore his supporters are going to come from this demographic.
I think the government is responding to the goals of those that they know will fully support them, the way they have in the 2008 and 2012 election. The Republican party and those groups of people associated with the party are not being listened to in regards to their wishes or needs because obviously a Democrat is in office. That is how it always will be in our political system though with dueling parties.
I totally agree with Maggie. It is obvious that most of the people who voted for Obama are young, students and people who are low in income. These people were the main target of Obama's campaign and therefore it is understandable why they voted for him. Like Maggie already mentioned, Obama was and is always more concerned about the lower class and always wanted to have higher taxes for the upper class. Students voted for him, because he said that education and health care would have a high priority for him as well.
DeleteWhen we look at the chart with the amount of voters with the allowance to vote and how many Americans actually voted, the result is not surprising for me either. Although the amount of people started rising again, the number of possible voters also goes up. Therefore, less people voted. For me it shows the dissatisfaction of American citizens as well as the lack of knowledge about politics. Like we could see in the test we took in class or the survey politicans had to take, the knowledge about "simple" politics how it seems, or rather politics we should know about, and the American system is not available at all. In my opinion, one of the biggest factors to regain more voters is to educate American citizens more about the system.
In my opinion,it is really hard to determine if the goals where already accomplished or not. From a european perspective it is hard to understand why Americans still do not have a health care system nor the necessary gun control. In addition, in Germany for example we do not have to pay for our education which makes questioning why Americans need to pay such a high amount of tuition every year. All of these things where goals that Obama wanted to accomplish, but he couldn't do so yet. Therefore, the question is why he couldnt keep his word, or is it the fault of American citizens?
As Maggie had said, the economy was a huge issue and remains so. Obama won the election, and it was seems to hint at the care that Obama has shown to those in the middle and lower classes. He has shown more concern and worry over a larger piece of America considering the middle and lower classes make up most of America's population. The voters were obviously looking for a president that showed a concern for fixing the economy due to the fact that the middle/lower class seems to be struggling more than the upper class. So obviously, Obama was the choice for the majority of US.
ReplyDeleteIs the government responding to the goals and wishes of people? I find it hard to say. While a Democrat is in office, the Republican party does not get a very large voice in our government. I am not very knowledgable about politics, but that much is clear. The two parties have been battling for decades and more often than not do not see eye to eye. The government seems to be responding to people's wishes and goals, but the truth is that there is always going to be groups of people that are not satisfied regardless of what party is in power.
Our government is a democracy; therefore it is majority rules. Majority does not mean everyone in the US. It simply means most people. I believe that the government could do better, but then again, it is not possible to please everyone. It is simply impossible for everyone in this country to completely agree on one issue.
When looking at the outcome of an election, I believe the person who got elected was the person who had built up the most momentum up until election day; that's why so much emphasis is placed on campaigning by the presidential nominees up until the very last available moment. Americans have a short attention span when it comes to politics, and they will vote for either the Republican or Democrat who better sold his/her message to the majority of the people. In 2012, this was a victory for Obama because more people bought into what he believed in and how he handled himself - more people found his overall message more appealing; that message was heard through the momentum of his campaign.
ReplyDeleteI'll start from the beginning of the election season when explaining what exactly I mean by momentum of a party's message. The campaign first unfolded slowly as most Americans did not know Romney and were very familiar with Obama, getting to know him over the last four years. This is why it is so difficult to defeat an incumbent, because the incumbent starts with all of the momentum. It remained in this fashion until the presidential debates took place.
As everyone well knows, the first debate was a major victory for Romney and it instantly made him competitive - the momentum shifted. The following debates were much closer in fashion, ultimately leaving us with a tie going into the last week before the election. Then Super Storm Sandy hit, which I believe played a big outcome on the election. It gave Obama the chance to appear presidential in a time of crisis right before the people voted, while Romney played it conservative and stayed away from the media. Exit polling after the election showed 42 percent of those who voted said Obama's response to Sandy was an important part of their decision. On top of that, nine percent of those who voted said their decision was made at the last minute. Sandy was fresh in everyone's mind, and the president's response gave him the last stride of momentum before the polls opened. The person with the most momentum at the end of the campaigning season usually wins, much like a sporting event.
That is not to say that Sandy directly re-elected Obama, I don't believe that at all, but it did play an important part. In fact, when speaking of voter turnout, I believe Hispanic Americans directly re-elected the president - 71 percent of Hispanic Americans voted for him.
The truth behind what the people want was very well shown in the outcome of the election. The USA is a rapidly changing country, there's no doubt about it. In order for the Republican Party to compete in the future with the Democratic Party, they have to rethink strategy. In hindsight, Senator Marco Rubio probably would have been the best choice to run with Mitt Romney. That isn't to say Paul Ryan wasn't good enough, I think he did very well. But the GOP needs to send a powerful signal to other demographics of the country - not just white people - and make sure they know that they are respected. In 2012's case, that demographic was Hispanic American voters, who cast out approximately 11 million ballots on election day. Obama beat Romney by less than three million in the popular vote.
When talking again about what the American people want and how the election represents that, you can't ignore entitlements. About half of all American homes are now receiving some kind of entitlement - some earned, some not. So any effort to reform or cut back on entitlements is a tough sell, which Romney wanted to do. Obama is perfectly content with how entitlements are now, and won because he effectively put together a coalition of the willing voters who had something to gain by keeping him in office.
After scanning through the poll results, I was not surprised by any of the statistics or numbers presented. Obviously, the economy has been peoples primary concern for the last four years which is why Obama won for a second term. As Thomas said, most Americans have a short attention span when it comes to politics and the hard issues our economy and nation faces. The younger generation searches and believes in hope, Obama's campaign is based on the lower/middle class and increasing their benefits. Many young people today can benefit from these changes, but our generation also likes to look half way into problems, as opposed to seeing them from all views.
ReplyDeleteI think that no matter what, America will never be happy; especially now, in this time. We have the older generation who for the most part are stuck in their beliefs and ways, whether that be Democratic or Republican, and we have the people who are between 26-40 years old who are hopefully thinking more "big picture" and know the facts, and then we have the generation 18-25 that to be honest is for the most part ignorant on politics and platforms all together. We cant please everyone, but I think our nation is in the next decade will be a completely different country than it is today.
The overall view that I saw from the exit poll was that young females played a major role in this election, which I found surprising. I see it as American women building momentum in having a strong political voice. Yes, Hilary Cilnton and Sotomayor are just a couple that have done a great job but the women that actually voted are the ones that are empowering and encouraging the rest. The huge hot button is healthcare which has been coined Obama Care. Many people and in particular women, are not sure how it will turn out. I still don't know much but I know that it will require every American to be covered by healthcare, regardless of who has to pay for it. And so mothers are mainly concerned for the sake of their children. I don't have any children yet but I want to be able to afford healthcare so that I can be healthy enough for when I want to start a family. And so I too am a bit worried and concerned about the new healthcare system.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I am not surpised to find out that Obama won the Black and Hispanic vote because regardless if he's doing a terrible job as president that's OK with Blacks and Hispanics. They rather him do a lousy job than another white man. And those Blacks and Hispanics are the ones that are pushing for a better life/status. They are hopeful that through Obama they will live that better life. The no high school dipolma want the chance to keep a livelihood as do the post graduate study. In the end we are all the same and are trying to stay alive with help from the economy/Obama.
I agree with Maggie I am not surprised at these statistics, one of Obamas a biggest campaign was about the economy. Of course majority of the lower income population was going to support Obama if he was willing to help these low-income classes. We see that 60 percent of the people who made less than 50K a year voted for Obama. It is the upper classes that made above 100K that voted for McCain.
ReplyDeleteSomething that I found very interesting was the fact that a lot of young voters voted for Obama again. I think this idea of “Change” attracts a lot of young people. Maybe we do want to see change and get more involved within our political system. Also, McCain brought this idea that “if you couldn’t afford for college, maybe college was not for you.” Many of these young voters are college students; of course we want financial government assistance because we cannot afford to pay 30 thousand dollars out of our pocket
The African American population showed an impressive statistic with over 94% of Obama supporters across the age groups. I wasn’t really surprised by this however because the same thing happened in the 2008 elections. However, the Latino vote was almost split in half with McCain and Obama, which I really don’t understand. Latinos are considered a minority in the US and a lot of us come from low-income family. Obama supports and gives benefits to families of low-income, why would we not support this?
People are looking for a better economy in the year 2012, especially as seen, those with a lower income.
I think the government could better respond to the goals and wishes of our people today because a lot of the time they promise things that never get done in order to get support. It is unfair that we trust our politicians this much.
After looking through the poll results I too am not surprised at what I see in the outcomes. I agree with both Kelly and Thomas when they say that Americans do not pay much attention to hard issues our economy and nation faces. As we can see from the results the younger generations really believe that Obama can make a difference, they wanted to take the leap and hope for the better. The older generations are more conservative and went with Romney; it seems as if people who were concern with the economy did not vote for Obama, maybe because they didn’t see much done within the first term.
ReplyDeleteI see that people concerned with healthcare tended to vote for Obama because he mentioned the healthcare for all U.S citizens. Most of Obama’s voters were lower income or people of minority races because he was doing things to help out. Regardless of why he won, he did so because he showed that he can make a difference and is responding to what the people in this country want. I believe that changes aren’t going to happen overnight, but they are happening gradually.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I saw in the statistics I figured it would look the way it does. What we already know is that the US was having economic problems for the past 4 years. Hope was kind of lost for the citizens and America was looking for a change. When President Obama came into the picture they saw this was the perfect opportunity. The polls show that the younger generation looked more to Obama (Democrats) reason being the younger generations are beginning to become more involved, especially because they wanted to have a fresh and new start. The older generation looked to Romney (Republicans) and reason for this could be because they are more conservative with their beliefs sticking with what they know. We also see that majority of the citizens who voted for Obama 2012 were Black, Hispanic, and Asian Americans. This does not really surprise me; from the 2008 election this was also the case. Obama puts his focus on middle-lower class citizens. Hispanics are considered to be minority so of course they are going to go with his campaign. America is primarily looking for a better economy.
ReplyDeleteAmericans are thinking change will happen in a blink of an eye, but realistically speaking it might take years for America to pick its self back up.
It was in newspapers, magazines, on the news, everywhere. The Latino vote was crucial to the election. I understand why. Latino status and economic beliefs stand with democratic views, much like President Obama's views and what he is doing for our country. However, Latinos personal beliefs can be very conservative, especially Latinos who are close to their culture or homeland; much like McCain and Romney's views. It was really a toss-up in the 2012 election. Clearly, President Obama made a huge impact and gained the Latino vote with a majority of 71%.
ReplyDeleteI found it pretty interesting that there was a 2.7 decrease in the percentage of eligible voters who took part in the 2012 election than the 2008. I kept up with the 2012 election and there were people who claimed that either way they voted, President Obama or Mitt Romney, it would be a lost cause. I think the government is listening. There are a lot of critics of President Obama claiming that he has not done anything in his previous four years of presidency. However, it takes more than four years to “fix” a country. I think enough people believed that considering President Obama was reelected.
The voter turnout statistics are extremely worrisome to me. The steep drop from the 1992 election to the 1996 election stood out to me. President Bill Clinton won his second election in pretty easy fashion, which leads me to believe that Republican Bob Dole must have run a pretty mundane campaign. Upon further review, the low points in voter turnout all came on landslide victories (1956 President Eisenhower and 1988 Ronald Regan). Also, these nationwide lows have all occurred on re-election years. These patterns reveal the popular opinion of these candidates. It seems apparent that voters during 1956, 1988, and 1996, either believed their president would win re-election and was not worth showing up to vote, or simply cared less about the proponent. From the data, highly publicized elections gain the most voter turn-out as displayed in 1960 (President Kennedy), and 2008 (President Obama). This leads me to question the American motivations in voting. It seems as though the populous tunes out when a president is up for re-election. Voting seems to be unnecessary to the American public, unless willed into it. Since there are such vast disparities from year to year, and the trend is not consistent, political participation is not a stable of our culture.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, voting rates should be at least around the same percentage every year because that means that the same people continue to vote every four years. Dips and rises display waxing and waning interest that does not bode well for a Democracy. It means that the population is invested or not in their presidential decision, where the trend should be relatively the same.
When it comes to the demographic data from the 2012 exit polls, it is clear that there are strong divides in the country. The data is predictable based upon the rhetoric surrounding democrats and republicans. The resounding call of Democratic voters is social programs, and for Republicans is the economy. Young minority voters sided with President Obama and older white males turned to Romney. These statistics are indicative of larger social issues in the country. Since the disparity is so stark, there seems to be little to no movement across racial, economic, and party boundaries. This type of divide explains the hatred for the other side and the unwilling attitude to compromise or get along. This is dangerous for our nation because it stops any sort of discussion or movement towards uniting. Both parties need to begin addressing the other side or these statistics could continually turn more drastic.
As many have written, I have to agree that the results were not exactly shocking. The fact that Obama has had the support of young America as well as those below a certain income level has been highly publicized. But I have to agree with Araceli,the only thing that I didn't realize was the vast diffence in the breakdown of voting by race.
ReplyDeleteWhile minority votes were a heavily discussed topic since Obama began running in '08, their impact is still more essential than people may think. Both exit polls showed Caucasians as the only race that supported Romney over Obama. This echos the growing fact that Caucasian Americans are no longer the majority and the melting pot is becoming more important once again.
I think that this conclusion needs to be taken into consideration within our politics and especially campaigning a little more. Obama seemed to master this, as in both elections he won the votes of the African American, Latino, and Asian communities. In the future, candidates will have to start taking these communities into consideration more and more because obviously they make a huge difference in the outcome.
Looking at the data from the 2012 election I would believe that the nation was more concerned with the economy, nearly half of the supporters for Obama voted alongside half of Romney’s supporters for the economy being a top issue. However, these numbers confuse me when compared to the overwhelming 90% of Obama supporters who believe the national economic condition is excellent or good. Something in this is not right. I strongly believe that Obama’s supporters want the government to show that they care in ways other than providing money, which is why more than half voted for health care and foreign policy as top issues. If the government focused on these issues more than money based issues, I feel the nation will be a little more trusting of the government. I think that government is proving to make progress, announcing the troops’ pulling in, focus on gun control, and still not losing focus on the financial issues as well. The nation cannot say that the government is not trying and that is all we can ask for at the moment.
ReplyDeleteI am not surprised when seeing the voting turnout. There has always been a much higher number of eligible people than those who vote. However, I feel that the reason for this cannot be pin pointed because there are many reasons why someone decides not to vote. What is a concern is that over the years the difference between those who can vote and those that actually do vote has increased. This makes me wonder or question if the government has failed in representing the people.
ReplyDeleteSomething that surprised me was that the one of the top issues was foreign policy. I expected the economy to be a top issues. I feel that the government is responding to the main concerns of the citizens. In 2008, only 26% said that the condition of the national economy was excellent or good. In 2012, this percentage had increased to a 90%. Specifically the government has impacted the Latino community in a positive way that has increased the voting outcome. Yet, the percentage of young voters has decreased. The government has met the issues of improving the community and has or is planning on helping the Latino community but has failed to meet the needs/goals of the youth.
-Cathy Davila
I was moderately surprised by the high number of Catholic supporters Obama had in both 08 and 12, though it did decrease a little bit. Other than that, however, these seem to be fairly predictable statistics.
ReplyDeleteAs a quick note in response to Araceli's comment about the 2.7 decrease in voter participation, I think that's fairly expected for a presidential race with an encumbant candidate. So few presidential candidates seeking reelection have lost (though some have) that many think they will simply win anyway.
Concerning which political party has the power in the country, just because Obama is a Democrat does not mean the Democrats have all the say. If I'm not mistaken, the Republican party held a majority in the Senate during Obama's first term. Even if it wasn't a majority, there are still enough representatives from varying viewpoints that no single group gets to bully another around. This is exactly why the checks and balances were established in the Constitution.
My personal opinion on bipartisanship is unfortunately quite pessimistic, however. In a country as large and diverse as the United States, reaching a national consensus is basically impossible. Some group, somewhere, is going to be disappointed by whichever group is in charge, and there isn't much to be done for it.
I don't want to sound like an anarchist, but I truly think the United States would function much, much more smoothly if it were divided into smaller countries. This isn't something I suggest we attempt to implement because it would never gain a majority vote. However, I think that one way to do this is to strengthen the power of the states against the national government, so that each smaller region can make pore personalized decisions for their own needs.
I am a supporter of "big government"; I just think it needs to be big on the local level.
Without sounding like a broken record, I too was not surprised with the voting results from 2008 in comparison to 2012. The results both in 2008 and 2012 seem to be pretty consistent in terms of the Republican Party only gaining support of the white males and white conservatives. Seeing as how Obama won all the minority votes and young generation votes, both educated and non-educated, it doesn’t come to a surprise that not only did the total voter outcome increase in 2012, but also Obama was obviously doing something right in terms of campaigning. I believe if the Republican Party had put in the same amount of effort into trying to fix the problems that appeal to those lower, income, minority families, the polls may have been a tad closer. Our economy is nowhere where it should be. Are we trying to fix it? Yes, of course! I believe we are improving, and the rest of America agrees too, or else the same type of people who voted for Obama in 2008 wouldn’t have voted for him again in this past election. However, looking closely at the exit polls, I realized just how large of a part minorities (black, Latinos, low income tax payers) play into our society and how easily they can sway our voting results. This economy is affecting them the most, and if the republicans or the next future president wants to gain their votes, they should really reconsider how and whom they gear their campaign and efforts towards.
ReplyDeleteWhat did people look for in 2012? "Someone that cares about them" came in as a top quality that i think tip the scale and won president Obama the Election. With the big media attacks on the Romney leaked videos saying he would only take care of the 1% and further destroy the middle class and social programs. The stats show Minnesota having the biggest turnout in America at 73.2% which is weird because i hardly heard of the candidates visiting this state, unlike Ohio (65.1%) or Pennsylvania (61.3%).
ReplyDeleteI do think the current Obama administration is trying to attain the goals of the people but it’s a long a hindered road. The House speaker John Boehner’s showdowns with the president don’t help but make the GOP look bad and unpopular for current and future voters. On issues like the Fiscal Cliff and other legislation.
Over all, I think we all know that race played a big role in the elections. The minorities voted for Obama because he reached out to them and they believed he can make change. He had more support when he first ran for President than he did during his second election, but that does not change the fact that the minorities helped him out. I think what the pople were looking for, like every election, is an economic change. However, it was not just that. The minorities, such as women, Latinos, and African Americans, were looking for something that would benefit them. It is clear that Romney lost because he did not have the Latino vote. If he would have interacted with them more, I think the election would have been a total different ball game. As you can see in Chicago, illegal immigrants are now allowed to have a driver's license. That is a big step for them, letting them know that they count. As for women, after the whole "binders full of women," and that pregnancy due to rape is because of God's will, Romney lost a lot of support.
ReplyDeleteI think Obama is doing a good job so far. I agree with Bisera on how people wanted change over night - that's not how it works. Obama has made progress and he has been paying attention to other issues other than just the economy.
By looking at this information I think it suggests that the people were looking for someone they can be hopeful for in this economic struggle. The recession was already in it’s 13th month when Obama entered office (the worst recession since The Great Depression) and the economy has slowly began to improve. These statistics show that people recognize this and are hoping for this trend to continue; otherwise they wouldn’t have continued to vote for him this term. Obama won younger generation votes, which I think has a lot to due with the digital media of today. It provides us with so many additional ways to stay connected, and the younger generation is so active in that domain. Minorities and the middle/lower class voters greatly contributed to Obama, and with majority being middle/lower class it’s clear why he won those votes too.
ReplyDeleteThere’s no way everyone can be pleased, but I think that the government is listening. I agree with what Araceli about it taking more than four years to fix a country. I think were at a point where people need to just accept that and hope for the best. There’s a lot to be built up but nothing can change overnight.