Oh boy. If you want to have some real fun, read the pre-election predictions from the folks at the National Review Online. I especially like this one from Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, who was sure his side was going to win every vote — and was wrong across the board.
Romney wins the Electoral College with room to spare — somewhere around 300 electors. All four marriage votes in the deepest of blue states (Washington, Maryland, Minnesota, and Maine) will be won by traditional-marriage supporters. This will happen even though supporters of same-sex marriage have outspent us by gargantuan amounts.
If same-sex marriage does pull out a win in one or more of these states, we will hear a lot about it being a tipping-point election for gay marriage. Wiser heads will realize that you don’t have a tipping point by winning on ground most favorable to you. The reality will remain that protecting marriage wins, and it wins with larger percentages than Republican candidates receive in statewide elections.
In Minnesota and Iowa, Mitt Romney will defy expectations and score truly historic wins. A state with longest track record of voting for Democratic presidential candidates — nine election cycles — will vote for a Republican. The marriage amendment will be part of the reason.
In Iowa, Evangelicals will turn out in record numbers to defeat the one Supreme Court judge up for retention election, David Wiggins. They will also give the control of the state Senate to Republicans, finally allowing a constitutional-amendment vote to restore traditional marriage in that state. The energy and enthusiasm in support of defeating Wiggins and electing a pro-marriage state Senate will enable Romney to carry the state.
Every single one of those predictions was wrong. Marriage equality went 4 for 4, Romney didn’t come close to winning Minnesota and Iowa, much less the election “with room to spare,” the Republicans did not win the Senate in Iowa and Judge Wiggins retained his seat. That’s Dick Morris-level bad.
And from the helplessly out of her depth S.E. Cupp:
Being the pragmatist is no fun, but I have Obama winning in a squeaker: 270 to 268. I give Obama Ohio, Nevada, and Colorado; but Romney gets Virginia, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Florida. And here’s where I go most out on a limb: I give Romney Wisconsin. This is based less on polls and more on my experiences on the ground in those states over the past year.
Swing and a miss. And you have to love the fact that she’s basing this not on actual evidence but on vague feelings after visiting those states. How telling.
From Noemie Emery:
Like Michael Barone, I think there’s a wave building the Democrats aren’t even aware of. It will make itself known pretty soon.
Yeah. Or not.
From Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life:
I think the Democratic party is going to be surprised to learn that women aren’t a single-issue voting bloc and can see through the manipulative games played this election. I think they may be surprised to find out that millions of women resent being told they should vote for the candidate who is promising them the most free stuff, at the expense of their children’s futures. Tomorrow, the question for many middle-class, working, Walmart moms like myself will be: “Which presidential candidate will help me make sure I can provide for my family?” Not: “Which candidate will guarantee me free birth control, even though I can get some at Target for nine bucks?”
And now, a word from actual women: 55% of women voted for Obama, only 44% for Romney. And women made up 54% of all voters. That’s an 18-point gender gap, 50% larger than in 2008.
Feels like 1980 to me: Same failed president, same crisis-plagued globe, same upbeat GOP nominee written off four years ago who won the key debate, same chance to get the Senate. Romney is the president-elect on Wednesday, with Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Colorado. Senate tied 50–50 after Ohio brings in Josh Mandel. Let the rebuilding begin.
There’s one really big difference between 1980 and 2012: A lot smaller percentage of the voters are white males. Demographics matter more than ideology. And Hewitt whiffed on all six of his swing state predictions, and the Ohio Senate race. A brilliant performance.
Mitt Romney will win the presidency with a 284–254 electoral-vote margin. He will win a plurality of the popular vote, with 49.8 percent to Obama’s 48.6 percent (1.6 percent to others). The Senate will be tied at 50–50. The House will see a minor loss, of two seats, for Republicans. Conservatives will find in future years that they have plenty to cheer about from Texas’s new senator, Ted Cruz.
Why will Romney win? The multi-organization conservative ground game this year is superb. Enthusiasm is high. Several bluish-purple states are on the verge of tipping to Romney, and at least one significant one will indeed tip his way. Obama’s support is comparatively desultory.
The republic will be saved!
Tomorrow we are going to learn that the coveted “single woman” voters Democrats have been targeting relentlessly through their war-on-women campaign are not going to turn out with the same overwhelming support for the president as they did in 2008. On top of this, by an even greater margin, Obama will lose married women, who will reject the president’s message and come out in large numbers to support Governor Romney.
This should not be entirely surprising. Just taking 2008 data into consideration, we know that married women made up the larger percentage of female voters and that the majority (56 percent) came out for John McCain. Add to this that the GOP managed to narrowly close the gender gap during the 2010 midterm elections, and my prediction is looking more reliable. Most important, however, is that Independent Women’s Voice conducted experimental research (through Evolving Strategies) last June that found the war-on-women narrative backfired with independents and weakly partisan voters — meaning this storyline is not going to capture women in the middle, and it certainly won’t sway women who are even only mildly Republican.
In a year when enthusiasm for President Obama is way down, it’s unlikely that a campaign of fearmongering and gender politics is a promising road to victory. It’s highly unlikely that these single women will come out in support for Romney but many will probably stay home this year. And the percentage of married women who vote Republican will be larger this time round.
Yet another woman who claims that most women think like she does and then turns out to be spectacularly wrong on election day.
And finally, Ben Shapiro, the incredibly dull boy wonder who started at the Worldnutdaily and now helps run the Breitbart empire:
This election is not going to be as close as the Democrats and their allies in the media would have us believe. The media have been worth at least ten points for Obama in this cycle — between ignoring Benghazi, bashing Romney, and propping up the president’s horrendous economic numbers, they’ve earned their Palace Guard paycheck — but it won’t be enough. In 2008, they bucked the old Lincoln adage by fooling all the people all of the time about the feckless and incompetent Obama. In 2012, Lincoln’s adage will have its revenge. We keep hearing that Republicans have an advantage in a turnout election. But Republicans also have an advantage in an independents election. Only in a Magical Mythical 2008 Replay do Democrats have an advantage. And Obama’s sleight of hand no longer wows us. Prediction: 311 electoral votes for Romney, including Florida, Wisconsin, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, Iowa, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. And count on a lot of whining from the media, which have used up every ounce of their credibility in defending an indefensible president.
I’m having way more fun than anyone should be allowed.
Like Dispatches on Facebook: