130,000 more Democrats than Republicans voted in the Kentucky primaries

[Dr. MB]

We had about 19% turnout. If the election were held today with these numbers: Bevin would lose 60% to 40% and lose 79% to 21% if you included Goforth and the other Republicans as voting for the Democrat.

This was the same all across the field. 150,000 more Democrats voted for Secretary of State, 101,000 more Democrats voted in the Agricultural Commissioner primary, etc.

[Ilhan Apologist]

That probably doesn't mean much, considering that (a) there are still more registered Democrats than registered Republicans in the state, and (b) the GOP primary wasn't expected to be competitive.

[Xing]

These sorts of things have very little predicative value.

[One Term Floridian]

I knew someone was going to post about this... So here is a map of the 2016 presidential election, by # of party primary/caucus ballots cast

Democrats win EC 307-231 and a narrow popular vote margin of 50.8%-49.2%

[Some of My Best Friends Are Gay]

I knew someone was going to post about this... So here is a map of the 2016 presidential election, by # of party primary/caucus ballots cast

Democrats win EC 304-234 and a narrow popular vote margin of 50.8%-49.2%

What's up with Wyoming? states like WV and KY can be explained by ancestral Democrats, but what explains Democrats getting more votes in Wyoming than Republicans did? unless that's an error...

[One Term Floridian]

I knew someone was going to post about this... So here is a map of the 2016 presidential election, by # of party primary/caucus ballots cast

Democrats win EC 304-234 and a narrow popular vote margin of 50.8%-49.2%

What's up with Wyoming? states like WV and KY can be explained by ancestral Democrats, but what explains Democrats getting more votes in Wyoming than Republicans did? unless that's an error...

Went back and corrected ND as well. Those two were "flukes" for the Democrats because the Republicans elected to do county conventions for those

[Alben Barkley]

It’s not just that more people voted in the Dem primaries. That was to be expected. It’s that:

1. Andy Beshear, despite being in a tight three-way race, got more votes by himself than Matt Bevin, who is an incumbent governor.

2. Rocky Adkins, despite finishing second in the Dem primaries, got nearly as many votes by himself as Matt Bevin, again an incumbent governor.

3. Matt Bevin could barely hold on to 50% of the vote in his own party primary against a bunch of no-name challengers who had no campaigns to speak of. That is a humiliating and pathetic margin, there’s no other way around it.

4. Matt Bevin actually outright LOST several counties to one of those no-name challengers, including both some ancestrally Democratic Eastern Kentucky counties and most of the deepest Republican South Central Kentucky counties.

The conclusion from this can only be that Matt Bevin has unbelievably weak support from his own party, which is an ominous sign for him because it means Republican turnout might be greatly depressed in November, the opposite of how it was when he won in 2015. Combined with the fact that Bevin is literally the least popular governor in the country and Beshear is the son of a popular governor who himself managed to win in 2015 even as Bevin won, and I have to say that if you still think Bevin is the favorite you are either burying your head in the sand or are just plain ignorant of the political reality in Kentucky right now.

Also, anyone bringing up anything presidential-related is way off-base, because Kentucky presidential results and gubernatorial results have always been extremely poorly correlated. You might as well have “proved” Charlie Baker was doomed because Trump lost big in MA in 2016.

[One Term Floridian]

It’s not just that more people voted in the Dem primaries. That was to be expected. It’s that:

1. Andy Beshear, despite being in a tight three-way race, got more votes by himself than Matt Bevin, who is an incumbent governor.

2. Rocky Adkins, despite finishing second in the Dem primaries, got nearly as many votes by himself as Matt Bevin, again an incumbent governor.

3. Matt Bevin could barely hold on to 50% of the vote in his own party primary against a bunch of no-name challengers who had no campaigns to speak of. That is a humiliating and pathetic margin, there’s no other way around it.

4. Matt Bevin actually outright LOST several counties to one of those no-name challengers, including both some ancestrally Democratic Eastern Kentucky counties and most of the deepest Republican South Central Kentucky counties.

The conclusion from this can only be that Matt Bevin has unbelievably weak support from his own party, which is an ominous sign for him because it means Republican turnout might be greatly depressed in November, the opposite of how it was when he won in 2015. Combined with the fact that Bevin is literally the least popular governor in the country and Beshear is the son of a popular governor who himself managed to win in 2015 even as Bevin won, and I have to say that if you still think Bevin is the favorite you are either burying your head in the sand or are just plain ignorant of the political reality in Kentucky right now.

No I agree Bevin is endangered. He really might be screwed actually. I just think it's counterproductive to merely say that Dems are favored because they (as expected) had more primary ballots cast. Ultimately, I think it'll be close once Trump comes in with his rallies. But a Beshear +3 victory is what I'm guessing right now

[TML]

Please note that although KY has a plurality of registered Democrats, many of these voters have been voting Republican for high-level offices in general elections over the past several decades. In fact, here are some percentages of Democrats who voted for Republican candidates in recent general elections, based on exit polls:

2000-Pres: 25%
2003-Gov: 24%
2004-Pres: 28%
2004-Sen: 18%
2008-Pres: 30%
2008-Sen: 24%
2010-Sen: 16%
2014-Sen: 17%
2016-Pres: 22%
2016-Sen: 15%

It is these percentages which contribute significantly to Republican blowouts in recent KY statewide races.

[Continential]

Please note that although KY has a plurality of registered Democrats, many of these voters have been voting Republican for high-level offices in general elections over the past several decades. In fact, here are some percentages of Democrats who voted for Republican candidates in recent general elections, based on exit polls:

2000-Pres: 25%
2003-Gov: 24%
2004-Pres: 28%
2004-Sen: 18%
2008-Pres: 30%
2008-Sen: 24%
2010-Sen: 16%
2014-Sen: 17%
2016-Pres: 22%
2016-Sen: 15%

It is these percentages which contribute significantly to Republican blowouts in recent KY statewide races.

I guess that Bevin will do around Conway's margin.

[Some of My Best Friends Are Gay]

Please note that although KY has a plurality of registered Democrats, many of these voters have been voting Republican for high-level offices in general elections over the past several decades. In fact, here are some percentages of Democrats who voted for Republican candidates in recent general elections, based on exit polls:

2000-Pres: 25%
2003-Gov: 24%
2004-Pres: 28%
2004-Sen: 18%
2008-Pres: 30%
2008-Sen: 24%
2010-Sen: 16%
2014-Sen: 17%
2016-Pres: 22%
2016-Sen: 15%

It is these percentages which contribute significantly to Republican blowouts in recent KY statewide races.

Some of these numbers are confusing to me. how did McConnell get 24% of registered Democrats in 2008 when he did very poorly in historically Democratic Eastern Kentucky? I'd ask the same question about the 2003 Gubernatorial election.

[Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort]

This happens literally every time.

[Continential]

How come Gatwood Galbraith got GOP votes in 2011 instead of Democratic votes.

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

It’s not just that more people voted in the Dem primaries. That was to be expected. It’s that:

1. Andy Beshear, despite being in a tight three-way race, got more votes by himself than Matt Bevin, who is an incumbent governor.

2. Rocky Adkins, despite finishing second in the Dem primaries, got nearly as many votes by himself as Matt Bevin, again an incumbent governor.

3. Matt Bevin could barely hold on to 50% of the vote in his own party primary against a bunch of no-name challengers who had no campaigns to speak of. That is a humiliating and pathetic margin, there’s no other way around it.

4. Matt Bevin actually outright LOST several counties to one of those no-name challengers, including both some ancestrally Democratic Eastern Kentucky counties and most of the deepest Republican South Central Kentucky counties.

The conclusion from this can only be that Matt Bevin has unbelievably weak support from his own party, which is an ominous sign for him because it means Republican turnout might be greatly depressed in November, the opposite of how it was when he won in 2015. Combined with the fact that Bevin is literally the least popular governor in the country and Beshear is the son of a popular governor who himself managed to win in 2015 even as Bevin won, and I have to say that if you still think Bevin is the favorite you are either burying your head in the sand or are just plain ignorant of the political reality in Kentucky right now.

Also, anyone bringing up anything presidential-related is way off-base, because Kentucky presidential results and gubernatorial results have always been extremely poorly correlated. You might as well have “proved” Charlie Baker was doomed because Trump lost big in MA in 2016.

Dude get a grip.

[Pericles]

Don't feed the troll.

[adamevans]

Please note that although KY has a plurality of registered Democrats, many of these voters have been voting Republican for high-level offices in general elections over the past several decades. In fact, here are some percentages of Democrats who voted for Republican candidates in recent general elections, based on exit polls:

2000-Pres: 25%
2003-Gov: 24%
2004-Pres: 28%
2004-Sen: 18%
2008-Pres: 30%
2008-Sen: 24%
2010-Sen: 16%
2014-Sen: 17%
2016-Pres: 22%
2016-Sen: 15%

It is these percentages which contribute significantly to Republican blowouts in recent KY statewide races.

Some of these numbers are confusing to me. how did McConnell get 24% of registered Democrats in 2008 when he did very poorly in historically Democratic Eastern Kentucky? I'd ask the same question about the 2003 Gubernatorial election.

Western Kentucky is also historically democratic, both went to McConnell and Fletcher handedly in their respective elections.