Washington Primary results thread (both parties; “polls close” at 11pm ET) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 17, 2024, 03:12:06 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Washington Primary results thread (both parties; “polls close” at 11pm ET) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Washington Primary results thread (both parties; “polls close” at 11pm ET)  (Read 10384 times)
cwt
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 362


« on: May 24, 2016, 05:58:17 PM »

The people voting in beauty contest primaries are voting not for the beauty contest but to vote in other local primary races.  We all know, unfortunately, the younger Sanders crowd is less likely to vote in those races and are therefore underrepresented despite the turnout being higher.

AFAIK, there aren't any local primary races today. Given the nature of how the ballot is set up, I don't see how there could be any.

Ah, that's right.  That wasn't the case in Nebraska, and I maintain that 1) what I said is generally correct for beauty contests and 2) the sample is still obviously unrepresentative and though bigger undersamples sanders supporters

I don't think that many regular people necessarily know or care that it's a only beauty contest. They just get the ballot in the mail, so they vote.
Logged
cwt
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 362


« Reply #1 on: May 24, 2016, 10:16:52 PM »

So it seems like this is proof we need to make caucuses illegal, no?

We do, but this isn't proof. Plenty of Democrats/liberals know it's meaningless and don't vote. Or they vote for a Republican instead, since that actually counts for something.
Logged
cwt
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 362


« Reply #2 on: May 24, 2016, 10:50:55 PM »

Here's an idea, how about we outlaw beauty contests? They're really nothing but a waste of money, and only give us unrepresentative data. I'm saying that as someone who voted in this.

That's why the 2012 primary was cancelled. The only reason we have a primary is because of an voter-approved initiative that passed after Pat Robertson won the GOP caucus in 1988.

Logged
cwt
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 362


« Reply #3 on: May 24, 2016, 10:55:17 PM »

So the real question is: Why didn't all these Hillary supporters participate in the caucus? The disparity in the caucus and primary results of Washington state is astounding; a 72-28 victory for Sanders to a 54-46 victory for Clinton. That's a swing of 52 points. Nebraska's caucus v. primary results weren't this bad.

Because Clinton basically had the nomination wrapped up at the time of the caucus. Why would her supporters waste a Saturday afternoon at a middle school cafeteria when she's going to win anyway?

With the primary, it's all done by mail, so there's no reason not to vote.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 14 queries.