Mass. has a population of about 6.7 million. Markey won by only about 118,000 votes.

[No Elephants]

The final vote was Markey, 642,988 and Gomez, 525,080, or a total turnout of 1,168,068.


Now, out of a total population of about 6.7 million, some are kids and some are adults who are not eligible to vote, such as foreign students in our many junior colleges, colleges and grad schools.

Still, in 2008, over 3 million voted in the Presidential election.

Meanwhile, think on this. Ed Markey started this race with a fair amount of name recognition statewide for a rep, Gomez with zero name recognition. Ed Markey, like the Kennedys and so many others in Massachusetts, is Irish Catholic.

"The five largest reported ancestries in Massachusetts are: Irish (23.8%), Italian (14.2%), French/French Canadian (or Franco-American) (12.9%), English (11.8%), and German (6.7%)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Massachusetts


Gomez is Hispanic. While Massachusetts is by no means as xenophobic as some states, its own Hispanic population does not even show up in wiki's breakdown of Massachusetts demographics. So, it's under 1%.

Massachusetts is one of the bluest states. Markey is blue; Gomez is red.

Markey has been in Congress for 37 years, Gomez 0.

Before this campaign, Markey had been in three primaries and eight challenged elections. This was Gomez's first campaign.

And Markey won by only 118,000 votes.

Now, a win is a win. But, it is being touted as a huge victory. (Because of the incredibly low turnout, already fading from the memory ot media, it seems, those 118,000 votes out of a possible 3 million plus, made a ten point difference, giving Markey 55% to Gomez's 45%.)

In light of all the facts, though, I see it as Markey having squeaked by.

And the low turn, perhaps the lowest ever, also speaks volumes.

[Enthusiast]

1. A special election usually has low participation.

This exaggerated the performance of Gomez. Just my take. In an ordinary election the margin would have been much greater - proportionally.

[No Elephants]

2. You are probably right about Gomez's showing.

His people should have been the more motivated to show up? Though Democrats should not have taken anything for granted after Brown.*


I think the turnout issue still matters, though. It is not just the special election because we've had those before. The turnout was far worse than the Coakley Brown special election--and she was behind by over 20 points going in, so it looked like a foregone conclusion, which lessens the incentive to show up.

I think voters are very dispirited. Some conspiracy theorists are saying Snowden is really in collusion with the PTB. I don't do well with conspiracy theories, but I did think the NSA stuff he revealed could have depressed the liberal vote for Markey. The loyalists stay loyal, no matter what; the right is fine with a surveillance state, but liberals hate it.

Anyway, now, we'll have another special election to replace Markey. Two special elections in a few months. Costly, but what can you do?

A Republican would have a good chance of winning that, I think, because of the nature of Markey's district. Maybe if a Democratic woman ran and Markey campaigned hard with her, Democrats could nail it, though.

Then again, he didn't even campaign hard for himself against Gomez. Between that and his 25% attendance record, I'm thinking he's either lazy or burned out, or both.

Bottom line: I'm glad Gomez did not win.

[Enthusiast]

3. " I think voters are very dispirited."

That's the objective. TPTB only want corporatists elected in 2014. And that ain't no theory.

The liberal vote was intentionally depressed in 2010. Again, this is no conspiracy theory but it was an actual conspiracy. Expect several very public operations to rip the heart out of the left side of the electorate before the election.