Dems Turnout Higher Than GOP For First Time Since 1990

American University ^ | Nov. 9, 2006 | American University

[FairOpinion]

The Democratic share of the eligible vote casting ballots for the House of Representatives increased from 16.8 percent in 2002 to 17.9 in 2006.

The Republican share declined sharply, from 19.2 percent in 2002 to 16.8 in 2006. This marks the first mid-term election since 1990 in which the Democrats garnered more votes that the GOP.

In the ballots so far counted in 2006 (and again excluding California, Oregon and Washington), citizens cast 31,703,311 votes for Democratic candidates for U.S. House, compared to 28,749,023 in 2002. The Republican candidates received 29,920,240 votes in 2006 compared with 32,771,580 in 2002.

[rrrod]

I voted against the RATS not for the Republicans. The Republicans in charge now are the most worthless in history. But unfortunately we lost some good people. The silver lining is the few RINOs that were tossed.

[Tamzee]

I didn't write that part at the bottom... the crowing, triumphant 3rd party member did.

You argued that folks here weren't bragging... they are.

[Tamzee]

Goodnight, onyx...

Tomorrow I'll invest in some Jack Daniels for medicinal purposes. I'll let you know if it works ;-)

[spunkets]

"Wait a few days, probably more like a few weeks and fec.gov will have ALL the data"

The data is already out there. It's a full time job and would take me an estimated 2 years to complete 50 states. I'm already familiar with WI and the R turnout was the same as it's been previously. There was no change in R BASE turnout. The change was an increase in D votes and success of D propaganda efforts on the switch hitters(I).

[Caipirabob]

Bring out your dead! Bring out your dead! But I'm not dead!

Brevity is the soul of wit. You nailed it with your post. I think we got nailed by the voting dead this election, and there hasn't been even a peep about pursuing a better voter identification system. If this continues, we'll be fighting tooth and nail to get elected dog catcher, forget congress.

[Tamzee]

Sorry, mixed up the posts, am tired... it was others on the thread arguing that nobody was bragging.

Goodnight.

[spunkets]

"You argued that folks here weren't bragging"

No I didn't. I also know there's Ds, Is and others here. Bragging by those folks doesn't interest me, because the real cause in the turnover of the house is not a change in base votes, it's a failure to attract and motivate for votes. I can also say that it's not, because the candidates, or incumbents were not conservative enough. Ignoring various regional issues, the main reason for the rat win is an unpopular war and missteps by some conservative candidates and incumbents.

[spunkets]

OK, I was confused about that. Good night.

[Echo Talon]

Turnout looked pretty low across the board didn't it? W got over 62,000,000 votes himself in 2004...

[Echo Talon]

The 3rd party in your example means nothing. The 3rd party most likely took votes from the winner, but that still means nothing. All your example shows is that the close runner up failed to convince folks he was worth voting for. The turnout was propably around 35%. Had the candidate done a better job, he would have motivated the needed votes out of the 65% that didn't vote. The 3rd party is still insignificant.

[HapaxLegamenon]

But Republicans and conservatives who didn't bother voting are directly responsible for the current Dem Congress.

What, I wonder, is going to be so different about the Democratic congress compared to the Republican one we just had?

[bonfire]

thanks.........I think....

[HapaxLegamenon]

They lost us the chance for a conservative majority SCOTUS. Given Bush's judgement in wanting to put Harriet Miers on the Court, and Spector's and the gang of 14 working to stop the growing list of conservative nominations waiting for a vote for other courts, we probably did not have a good chance anyway.

[spunkets]

The overall turnout is always higher in a presidential election year than it is in a midterm year. The turnout of the base is buried and takes a significant amount of work to extract. Those numbers are never reported. As far as the 62M+ votes W got goes, that includes those that were swayed to vote for him.

[CutePuppy]

One is here, I am sure there are many more similar ones.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1736379/posts?page=111#111

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1736379/posts?page=112#112

[Echo Talon]

Kerry got over 59,000,000

Take a look

Over 122,000,000 votes cast in 2004

[Roy Tucker]

And you can thank McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform". Another legacy piece of legislation from Senator John McCain.

[AmeriBrit]

the MSM and its perpetual liberal lie machine ground the base into the ground, suppressed votes and turn-out , and waalaaa , the dems won.. is that too tough to follow..

---

I don't wish you any harm but when you fall off that pedestal you've placed yourself on, I hope you land on your head and it manages to wake up the part of your brain that's apparently been asleep for the past few months.

Everything the MSM printed or said that was anti-Republican, you repeated. Not once did you post anything that would encourage the voters, and not once did you post anything good about the right wing, state or national.

A few days before the election your posts were such downers and depressing some of us decided to just ignore anything you posted. Whether you realize it or not you were aiding and abetting the RATS.

[spunkets]

Yeah, so? Most of those votes were probably D otherwise and the rest are crackpots. Talent should have run a better campaign and motivated folks. He had a pool of 3.7M to work on that didn't vote plus the Is that voted D. Why focus on the pool of 10K crackpots for blame? Is it easier to convince someone that voted for the D, or wasn't motivated to vote, or someone that's a dedicated LPer?

[Soliton]

We won the popular vote, but lost the election! This proves all of the polls wrong, particularly the generic ones. Repub candidates got more overall votes than dems. The Dem strategy of supressing the values voters worked. I even voted with a clothes pin on my nose.