This is at American Thinker today:
Conservatives need to take a collective breath and look closer at the numbers before they buy into the idea that GOP nominee Mitt Romney’s defeat was due to some kind of national demographic shift that now makes Democrat presidential candidates’ armor impenetrable. Before you give in to the hysteria, here are a few things to keep in mind.
First, Barack Obama’s re-election showing was actually pretty unimpressive for a guy whose philosophies voters have supposedly adopted. As of this writing on Wednesday, Obama’s vote total stood at an unimpressive 60,119,958. That’s about what John Kerry got in 2004 59,028,444. President George W. Bush actually did far better than Obama in his 2004 reelection quest, posting a vote total that was about 2 million higher 62,040,610 than what Obama got on Tuesday. That’s hardly a remarkable finish in a country with a population that has increased. In fact, it’s a decline of 9 million votes from Obama’s 2008 total.
Had Romney 57,425,441 done as well as McCain did in 2008 59,934,814, he and Obama would have run neck and neck, virtually matching each other’s vote totals. That’s hardly the stuff of demographic ruin.
The question Republicans and conservatives need to ask is not why voters showed up for Obama, whose turnout wasn’t exactly extraordinary, but why millions of their own voters, people who had pulled the lever for Bush and McCain, didn’t do the same for Romney or simply stayed home….