End of conventional wisdom? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 03:18:15 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  End of conventional wisdom? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: End of conventional wisdom?  (Read 4270 times)
Shira
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,858


« on: November 13, 2004, 04:17:54 AM »


 Still trying to determine what the results of what this election mean. I for one thought that Kerry was going to win a slight victory, and the only way Bush was going to win was going to be an electoral college victory, not a popular vote victory. I was of course very much so in error.

   The election being an high turnout election with massive voter registration drives convinced me that the high turnout will help Kerry, and hurt Bush in the swing states, and the early returns confirmed this, but as the numbers continued to come in, I was surprised to say the least, but in retrospect, I should not have been.

  The previous conventional wisdom was that high turnout elections help Democrats, but going though previous presidential elections, while a high turnout helped JFK in 60, and the 74 and 82 mid term elections became Democratic blowouts with a high turnout, since then, it seems that lower turnout has either been a wash or even a negative for Democrats. In 92, a high turnout turned out to be a wash for Democrats, though Perot drove most of the higher turnout. In the 94 and 02 midterms, a high turnout helped the GOP rather than the Democrats, while the low turnout 98 mid terms did the opposite. The 96 presidential election had the lowest turnout where Clinton was re elected.

   I am not one who will say Bush has a mandate, but the fact he has 60 million + votes, and the Democrats threw everything they got to increase turnout, and the GOP has 94 like numbers in the congressional races in a high turnout election says that pundits have to rethink their math in terms of elections. 51% is still 51%, a close election that was driven but outside groups and events that for the most part broke Mr. Bushs way, but getting 51% of an election that had 60% Voting age population turnout vs a more typical 50% VAP turnout is a little different.
 
   I am curious what has changed that has made higher turnout benifit the GOP?

I have the filling that the Republicans have exhausted all their turnout potential in last election. Any additional turnout would probably benefit the Democrats.
It is not going to happen in the near future, but I think that with 70% turnout the Democrats will easily win.
It is not clear what the turnout was this time. According to the barometer in the atlas it looks like the mid fifties.
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 0.018 seconds with 11 queries.