Warning: main(/home/b4v/public_html/wp-content/themes/blixed/above.php) [function.main]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/b4v/public_html/wp-content/themes/blixed/single.php on line 5
Warning: main() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/b4v/public_html/wp-content/themes/blixed/above.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/b4v/public_html/wp-content/themes/blixed/single.php on line 5
Record Primary Turnout: What Does it Mean?
February 12th, 2008 at 05:36pm Mark Noonan
Not much, as David Freddoso points out over at NRO’s The Corner:
In the open election of 1988, 23 million Democrats voted in primaries, as did 12 million Republicans. Yes, you’re reading that correctly. Nearly twice as many Democrats voted. That was a precursor to President Michael Dukakis’s election.
In 1980, Democrats actually had an incumbent president, who was challenged by Ted Kennedy. Republicans, meanwhile, had a competitive primary between Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Democrats cast 16.1 million votes in their primaries that year, compared to just (corrected) 12.7 million for Republicans. We all know what happened in Jimmy Carter’s second term, don’t we?
The only times Republicans have outnumbered Democrats in primaries in the last 35 years were 2000 and 1996 — both years when Republicans were sick of being out of power. Even in those years, Republican turnout was only slightly higher than Democratic turnout.
That’s where the Democrats are now — they are sick of being out of power. Plus, they’ll probably still be choosing their nominee in July, so expect their advantage to climb. Their turnout is higher, just as it always has been, it shouldn’t come as any surprise.
I thought there was something funny in all that talk of record turnout, especially as I saw several contests where, yes, Democrat turnout was higher than ever, but so was GOP turnout (even if still a lower number than the Democrats’). Certainly, Democrats are far more engaged right now and the political stars are aligned right for them to have a very good shot at winning in November - but any Democrat who extrapolates from primary turnout to November victory is engaging in wishful thinking. There has to be an actual contest - the battle has to be joined, and the votes cast. For more information on this sort of necessity, you might ask a player for the New England Patriots.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Republicans
21 Comments
1. neocon | February 12th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
I wonder what the Republican turnout will be in the general when we’re faced with the prospects of electing either McCain or an inexperienced Barak Hussein Obama or the second coming of Bill Clinton?
I will bet on the over.
2. searp | February 12th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Be glad to take that bet.
3. neocon | February 12th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
searp,
Do you understand what the over is?
4. searp | February 12th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Neocon, nope, I don’t, my bad. I’d like to share some expert commentary on the upcoming election:
MR. JOE SCARBOROUGH: They believe this is going to be a landslide of historic proportions. They will not admit it to people in the media or, or on the air, but most Republicans believe this is going to be a landslide of epic proportions, and Mitt Romney has to know that, too. And guess what? It will always be remembered as, like ‘64 was the Goldwater landslide. You know, this will be on John McCain’s hands.
5. Mark Noonan | February 12th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
searp,
Just keep believing that you’ve already won…
6. searp | February 12th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Mark: I can only do a few things. I can vote. I can give money and time to the candidate of my choice.
I plan on doing all of that.
Besides, although I like the chances of the Democrats this year, I’d like to point out that Mr. Scarborough is a really well connected… Republican.
7. neocon | February 12th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
searp,
Scarborough? MSNBC? Can you provide a more objective source? Maybe the DNC?
Meanwhile, the superdelegate count has Hillary comfortably in the lead while the regular delegates obviously prefer Obama. I smell a knock down drag out fight which will keep those on the losing end away from the polls come November. Ouch.
8. neocon | February 12th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Over/Under - most often used in sporting events when a total point count is determined and betters have the option to bet on the over (more points being scored) or the under (less points being scored). Just FYI.
9. searp | February 12th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Um, Joe Scarborough was a Republican congressman. I do not believe that he has ever, or will ever, have any affiliation at all with the Democrats.
I suppose we will see for the rest of it.
10. searp | February 12th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Neo: thanks for the info. So the bet would be on total turnout? Relative to 04? That would be tough for me, because I think Republican turnout will be low. Too many constituencies just really do not like McCain.
11. neocon | February 12th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
I don’t question Scarboroughs past Congressional cred, I do however deeply question his current employers cred and his “standing” therein.
12. President Bush » Re&hellip | February 12th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
[…] TRIP MY WIRE wrote an interesting post today on Record Primary Turnout: What Does it Mean?Here’s a quick excerpt…president, who was challenged by Ted Kennedy. Republicans, meanwhile, had a competitive primary between Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. […]
13. MDA | February 12th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
What it means is that people are absolutely fed up, dismayed and disgusted with what Bush has wrought. This is evident from the reaction of Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, Dobson, Ingram etc to John McCain. What they are really saying is that McCain isn’t enough like Bush but the irony is that Bush is no conservative by any interpretation of the word. Republicans and independents are voting for Obama. Democratic turn out in these primaries is 2 for 1 vs Republican. Democratic fund rasing is vastly ahead of Republican efforts to raise money. In large measure the turmoil on the Republican/”conservative” side vs what is going on with Hillary vs Obama is a complete rebuke of everything GWB has done to our country and our place in the world.
There is going to be a new Sheriff in town and his name is Reggie Hammond!
14. keefer | February 13th, 2008 at 5:37 am
neocon, Joe’s a moderate at best, on a far-left network. He’s still got some GOP blood in him, but it’s light purple. Hell, he probably plays poker with Matthews, Olberkook, and Schuster…
15. phnx | February 13th, 2008 at 7:21 am
MDA, McCain got the nomination thanks to independents and crossover dem spoilers. The opposition to him is an effort by the base to influence his selection of a conservative VP. No matter which of you candidates gets the nomination, a percentage of your electorate will be upset. The logical choice for them is McCain who certainly can’t be considered a Bush ally since he opposed most of the major initiatives of the President and is widely considered a maverick, his own man, etc. When it comes time to vote, Bush won’t be on the ballot, and you two are far too left of center for the average american.
16. Christian Wright | February 13th, 2008 at 7:53 am
Barack Obama didn’t just beat Hillary in Virginia. He didn’t just get more votes than John McCain. In “red” Virginia, Obama got 142,000 more votes than all the Republicans put together.
17. coulterfan | February 13th, 2008 at 8:37 am
I know, Mark. I know. . . In your world everybody is thrilled with what Bush and his policies have done to America.
I remember your insisting that ‘nobody will be happier than a GOPer in November’ of 2006!
Well, if you were happy about 2006, just wait until November of 2008!
18. MDA | February 13th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Phbx:
If the results of the primaries are any indication of what “the average American” wants, then clearly they choose Obama. Republican turnout is anemic. Democrats are energized. Obama is a far better speaker and has a charasmatic personality. McCain; as much as I like him is old and cranky and his age; as much as I hate to say it, is a factor especially to younger voters who are turning out in record numbers. Why would anyone want to continue with a Republican president when the current one has done so much damage? Voting decisions often come down the the lowest common demoninator and no matter who McCain chooses as a VP, if the present is any indication of the future then this country will not elect another Republican president.
BTW, Obama has gotten more crossover voters than McCain. Wishful thinking on your part…
19. DM | February 13th, 2008 at 10:05 am
I’m not sure how it works in other states but in NY you must be a registered Republican or registered Democrat in order to vote in the NY primaries. There are a considerable number of people not affiliated with those parties that vote in the general election. With that 2 things come to mind;
1.) A lot of people are disenfranchised that would likely have a significant impact in the primaries. This is particularly disheartening as the Republican and Democrat candidates will likely be nominated to most of the other parties – after the fact.
2.) With those people not able to vote, I think the majority are either Conservative or tend to be center Independent. That does not bode well for the liberal minded Democrat candidates. For a person like McCain the implication is significant. The Democrats know this and try to appear middle of the road without upsetting the far left base. While McCain still has a lot of work to do there is little chance of the Democrats garnering much support from the conservative base given the options. That leaves the Independents to sway the election. Even if they split evenly I think you’d find the general election closely contested and that the percentages shown in the primaries carry little weight.
Those unable to vote in the primaries are a much stronger force than they’re currently being recognized for.
20. Nobush-sh*t73 | February 15th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Record turnout is because the entire country (mostly) is so f***ing pissed off at the Bush regime. Spin it how you like, but that is the truth, and you, and everybody, knows it.
21. Bob Taft | February 15th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
It’s not just the current regime they’re upset with. It’ a century of bad policies that have eroded the fabric of our Republic.
The bureaucratic beast has grown for too long without Constitutional constraint and the people know it. They are sick of being taxed to support policies and agendas that are contrary to their best interests.
This means we must nominate our best candidate to defeat the otherwise impending liberal take over. The one who will bring about the changes we all know we need and has a message that crosses party lines, but is most appealing to those of us who are conservatives.
You all know we have to nominate Ron Paul by now, don’t you?
Onward to victory !
Long live the Republic ! !