Why was Dem primary turnout so piss-poor?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 31, 2024, 08:59:40 AM
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
  Why was Dem primary turnout so piss-poor?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why was Dem primary turnout so piss-poor?  (Read 229 times)
Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,475
Norway


P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 12, 2016, 02:42:40 PM »

This was something I, like most people, had blown off when Trump was touting the turnout discrepancies between the Dems and the Pubs, and especially between 2008 and now.  Turnout was very low overall in 2016 compared to the last two election cycles, which got me thinking if this was more of a voter enthusiasm problem that the Dems had rather than the base simply taking for granted that Hillary would get the nomination (my previous hypothesis).  So what the hell happened here?  Did Clinton and Sanders just suck at getting people excited?  Or did the media focus so much on the GOP clown show that everyone forgot the Democrats were even having a primary?
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2016, 02:47:01 PM »

One word:  Clinton

Hillary Clinton was a flawed, terrible candidate who did not inspire loyalty or enthusiasm even from her own base.
Logged
Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,475
Norway


P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 12, 2016, 02:51:00 PM »

One word:  Clinton

Hillary Clinton was a flawed, terrible candidate who did not inspire loyalty or enthusiasm even from her own base.

She still got millions of more votes than Sanders, who clearly had a more enthusiastic base.
Logged
°Leprechaun
tmcusa2
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,248
Uruguay


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 12, 2016, 02:53:45 PM »

Overconfidence? "Clinton is inevitable". If she was inevitable, there was no need to vote. I am not saying that I believe that this was a factor, but maybe. Trump supporters on the other hand may have thought that although he appeared to be behind, that if they voted, he could win. Some obviously believed that he would win. Democrats need to be more humble.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,014


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 12, 2016, 02:59:03 PM »

Atlas says turnout in the GOP primary was 29.6 million and 30.8 million for Dems. Low turnout compared to previous years? There were only two real candidates as opposed to four of five might have played a role.
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 12, 2016, 03:00:54 PM »

How can you have a good turnout with closed primaries & voter reg deadlines closing in places like NY 8-9 months back? Even if a guy who saw Sanders in the debate & was an independent wanted to vote he couldn't - It is ridiculous - Dems are doing everything to turn into a smaller party rather than growing & welcoming people.

There were many reasons - GOP front loaded with 12 debates & the media have huge publicity to them with a reality star in Trump.

The Dems had like 6 initial debates vs 26 last time. The debates were in MLK day or Christmas Eve kind of when no1 watched. 500 Supers were locked in for Clinton with a complete blackout of Sanders with some news channels mocking him openly.

This was never supposed to be a big race - Even when Sanders started winning the Black vote was stacked against him as a bloc!

I don't think Dems themselves did anything to encourage good turnout!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 12, 2016, 03:01:59 PM »

Atlas says turnout in the GOP primary was 29.6 million and 30.8 million for Dems. Low turnout compared to previous years? There were only two real candidates as opposed to four of five might have played a role.

GOP primary was in a way over 30-40 days before Dems with turnout falling in the late stages with Dems fighting all the way to CA!

There was clearly a subdued contest with an enthusiasm gap!
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 12, 2016, 03:46:08 PM »

One word:  Clinton

Hillary Clinton was a flawed, terrible candidate who did not inspire loyalty or enthusiasm even from her own base.

She still got millions of more votes than Sanders, who clearly had a more enthusiastic base.

True, but don't you think that the expectation was that the Clinton campaign would knock out Sanders far earlier than they actually did?
Logged
Seriously?
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: November 12, 2016, 05:42:18 PM »

One word:  Clinton

Hillary Clinton was a flawed, terrible candidate who did not inspire loyalty or enthusiasm even from her own base.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
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 0.227 seconds with 13 queries.