Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrat Primary turnout not a even close to being a record
Accuracy In Media ^ | Paul Weyrich

Posted on 03/09/2004 8:08:22 PM PST by MNJohnnie

The reason for my apology was that throughout this primary season we have been hearing about the record turnout of voters participating in Democrat caucuses and primaries. I bought the lie. The truth is that, except for Iowa and New Hampshire, there has not been any sort of record turnout for the Democrats.

Even in New Hampshire the vote was far less than what the Republicans had when they last had a contested primary in 2000. The Democrats this year had 219,787 votes in their primary. The GOP in 2000 had 239,523 votes. That 20,000 difference is major in a state the size of New Hampshire.

Let's examine the turnout in some of the other states which has gone absolutely unreported anywhere:

In Missouri, 416,104 voters turned out for the Democrats. But in 1988, when there was also a hotly contested race, the Democrat turnout was 527,805. I guess local boy Dick Gephardt dropping out didn't help any this year. And the Republicans in 2000 had 475,705, by the way. Or how about North Dakota? Do you know the total vote up there this year for the Democrats? It was a mere 12,512. By contrast, in 1992 when the Democrats had a lively race (when Bill Clinton was nominated), the Democrat turnout was 32,786. In Oklahoma where you had a very hot race between Wesley Clark, John Edwards and John Kerry the Democrat turnout was 302,169. By contrast, in 1992 it was 416,129, a difference of more than 100,000 votes. In South Carolina it is true that the Democrats with 291,175 bested their 1992 showing of 116,414. They had local favorite son John Edwards (He was born there) on the ballot. But contrast this with the 2000 GOP contest where George W. Bush and John McCain shot it out. The Republican total four years ago in South Carolina was 565,991.... a difference of 270,000-some votes. Or how about Michigan? I heard several media reports about the supposed record turnout there with people standing in line and the possibility of polling hours being extended. This for a total vote of 162,929. That's nice, except that in 1988 there were about 212,000 Democrats who voted. Get this; in 2000 1,392,023 Republicans went to the polls to vote for delegates for President. That's a difference of a little more than one million one hundred thousand votes. The Democrat turnout in Washington State was really anemic compared with even four years ago when Al Gore had things wrapped up, but even then the GOP turnout was about 350,000 higher than the Democrats that year. Now let's look at New Mexico. You know, the state of intrepid vice presidential possibility Gov. Bill Richardson. The Democrat turnout this year was 94,108. Even in 2000, with Al Gore having things totally in hand, there were 132,280 votes. Ah, but in 1992 when Clinton was slugging it out 181,443 voters came to the polls. And here's the point: New Mexico has 495,000 registered Democrats and only 310,000 registered Republicans. Still, only 19,000 more Democrats voted in an early 2004 primary than Republicans who voted in a very late 2000 primary.

(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...


TOPICS: Alabama; Alaska; Arizona; Arkansas; California; Colorado; Connecticut; Delaware; Florida; Georgia; Hawaii; Idaho; Illinois; Indiana; Iowa; Kansas; Kentucky; Louisiana; Maine; Maryland; Massachusetts; Michigan; Minnesota; Mississippi; Missouri; Montana; Nebraska; Nevada; New Hampshire; New Jersey; New Mexico; New York; North Carolina; North Dakota; Ohio; Oklahoma; Oregon; Pennsylvania; Rhode Island; South Carolina; South Dakota; Tennessee; Texas; Utah; Vermont; Virginia; Washington; West Virginia; Wisconsin; Wyoming; Campaign News; Issues; Parties
KEYWORDS: 2004election; bush; kerry; mediashillsforkerry; president; presidential; primary

1 posted on 03/09/2004 8:08:23 PM PST by MNJohnnie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

If this one couldn't get elected,             what makes you think this one can?


2 posted on 03/10/2004 1:35:44 PM PST by Lady Jag (It's in the bag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
Very Good! Very informative. Thanks for the hard work and research. Surely there must be another forum, editorial or otherwise, where you can get this published.

Keep up the good work.
3 posted on 03/10/2004 11:22:33 PM PST by no dems
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
All this tells me is that the rats don't bother stuffing the ballot bix in primaries; unless the're the next rat rising star perhaps.
4 posted on 03/13/2004 11:45:32 PM PST by Diplomat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson