Maybe, but, then again, with hindsight, maybe not. But, on the third hand, maybe.

[No Elephants]

September 29, 2011

Democrats Dispirited About Voting in 2012

Republicans' enthusiasm for voting matches 2004 and exceeds 2008
by Lydia Saad

PRINCETON, NJ -- In thinking about the 2012 presidential election, 45% of Democrats and independents who lean Democratic say they are more enthusiastic about voting than usual, while nearly as many, 44%, are less enthusiastic. This is in sharp contrast to 2008 and, to a lesser extent, 2004, when the great majority of Democrats expressed heightened enthusiasm about voting.

Much more, including graphs with colored lines and everything, at

http://www.gallup.com/poll/149759/democrats-dispirited-voting-2012.aspx



Couple of thoughts. Republicans are more enthusiastic about voting in 2012 because they want change from a Democratic administration, same as Democrats were very enthusiastic about voting in 2004 and 2008. Republicans who were disenchanted with Bush wanted stayed home in 2004, too, rather than vote Democratic or third party.

Luckily for Democrats, they have the youth vote and we get a fresh crop of 18 year olds every year.


But, a huge number of voters did stay home, for whatever reason, last Tuesday and that can't be healthy.

Democrats overall did not do as well in 2012 as did Republicans in 2010.

I think thirty states out of 50 have Republican Governors.

If California's 55 electoral votes had not flipped to Democratic at about the same time as the South was flipping to Republican (after the Civil Rights Act of 1964), I don't know if the Democrats could have elected many Presidents; and, Republicans in California have been trying for a long time to pass legislation that apportions California's electoral votes in accordance with the popular vote in California, which is pretty red, if you wander away from the population centers of San Fransisco and Los Angeles. (And, that is true of most states; Democrats cluster in and around large population centers.)

And Congressional approval rates have been below 20 for a long time, no matter who has controlled Congress.

And I think more than a few Democrats who won would have had a much harder time of winning, but for Akin, Mourdock and the resulting effect on the women's vote of portraying the Republican Party as warring on women and, in general, extreme. And I have a strong feeling that Republican politicians ae not going to be making those kinds of comments anymore.


So, despite the Democratic victory Tuesday, both Parties have some thinking to do, although only one Party seems to be saying that publicly.

[Enthusiast]

1. I don't know about Gallup.

It appears that their low enthusiasm Democrats meme was not borne out in the election results. Weren't they also off in their final presidential polls?

[No Elephants]

2. Voter turnout in 2012 was less than in 2008 and 2004.

He got the votes of a majority of those who turned out, but the total number of those who do turnout is pitifully small in comparison to the number of American citizens who are over 18.

The group estimated 126 million people voted in the election, where President Barack Obama defeated GOP nominee Mitt Romney. That means 93 million eligible citizens did not cast ballots.

Read more: http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/national/election-results-2012-voter-turnout-lower-than-2008-and-2004-report-says#ixzz2BpfHwY9y
.

Bearing in mind that the total resident population of the US was estimated to be 314,743,000 as of October 12--counting infants, children, felons who are ineligible to vote, people in mental institutions who are ineligble to vote, street people who have no residences, etc., the fact that over 93 million people who were eligible to vote stayed away from the polls is very telling, IMO.

Of course, there is a movement saying that the system is so broken no one should give the system even the illusion of legitimacy by voting. But I don't think adherents to that movement account for more than a tiny fraction of people who don't bother to vote.

[Leopolds Ghost]

3. It is true that nothing changed at the House level

But perhaps extreme gerrymandering has something to do with that.

Voters in MD voted to legalize casino gambling across the state among other famed "liberal ballot initiatives".