The Year Of Campaign Chaos
Yet Freedom
McCain Replaces Palin With Startled Deer
Blaming Homeowners For This Crisis? Please
Memo To Republicans - Politics Is War
The Uplifting Debate
A Movement to Break the Silence of Churches in Political Campaigns
Of Generals And Victories
Post - Wall Street
Michelle Obama's Fearful Vision
Only Ourselves To Blame
Interesting Times
Memo To McCain: Take The Gloves Off
Main Street Need To Support Bail Out
A Heartbeat Away
The Curtain On The Last Act
Trust Us? In A Pig's Eye, I Say
Hoover-Era Ghost Stories No Longer Apply
America's Nervous Breakdown -- And The World's
Harper's Index
Why Independents Care So Much About Health Care
Gagging On Wall Street's Bailout
Does McCain Still Agree With Reagan That Government Is The Problem?
The Grip Of Bad Ideas
Who Needs To Pay Their Mortgage And Who Doesn't?
In Sunny Santa Monica, A New Appreciation Of Life
The War To Promote Terror
If Rescue Passes, Here's Who Gets Credit And Blame
Hail Mary Vs. Cool Barry
GOP To McCain: Attack Obama Now
Biden Can't Abide By The Truth
Adult Supervision Required
Pols, The Press And The Financial Crisis
Dear Congress: Put The Gun Down Now
No Country For Liberals
Palin Wins Big With A Reagan-Like Flair
Boon For Voter Fraud, Bust For Democracy
Village Idiocy
And In Other News …
What Is A Loophole?
It Was Palin's Night To Avoid Losing
Compassion, Certainly, But Justice, Too
Gotcha Questions For Katie Couric (And Her Colleagues)
Palin Alone Disqualifies McCain
Taking Stock of Testosterone
Whodunit ?
The Worst Of Both Worlds
The Change That Has Already Happened
The Supersize Bailout
Pundits Side With Wall Street Over Main Street
How To Talk To Someone Who Sounds Racist
Tough Speeches Instead Of Tough Choices
Palin Dominates VP Debate
Why the Bailout Is a Crock -- Opinion
Catholics And Abortion (Again)
Blind Defense of Koran Abrogates Reality
The Sky is Falling
What McCain Learned From The Rough Rider
McCain's Debate Challenge



Lambro180.jpg
Primary Turnout Claims Turn Out Half-Baked
Donald Lambro 5/15/2008
Digg This Story!
Del.icio.us Reddit StumbleUpon Yahoo! MyWeb Technorati Google Bookmarks Furl Ma.gnolia Newsvine Bloglines Rojo Facebook

WASHINGTON -- Democrats are claiming that high voter turnout in their primaries is proof positive that they'll win the White House in November.

It is a familiar claim, made by one party or the other, that pops up every four years, but it contains not a morsel of truth. Many studies show no correlation between party primary participation and general election results.

Nevertheless, in a memorandum to its supporters and the news media, the Democratic National Committee is crowing, "(R)ecord turnout during the primaries has been transformational for the Democratic Party as record numbers of new voters are being registered."

In this equation, new primary voters equal more general election votes. "Democrats are energized all across the country and ... if Democrats show up and talk about our values, we will win," the memo asserts.

No one knows more about turnout than Curt Gans, the veteran voter analyst who heads the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate at American University. So when I asked him if the Democrats' claims had merit, he explained that it is wrong to conclude that a party's higher primary turnout will result in victory at the ballot box in the election.

"It is true that
turnout has been extraordinary this primary season, particularly in the Democratic party, but also in the Republican party," Gans told me. As of last week, "24 states that have had primaries have had record turnout, 22 Democratic primaries have set records and 12 Republican primaries have set records."

"But there is not necessarily a correlation between primary turnout and general election turnout," he continued. "There is no rule on this. You can have high turnout in the primaries and still lose."

Look what happened to the Democrats when George McGovern won the nomination in 1972 on a wave of anti-war fervor that produced record primary turnout in his party. The South Dakota senator was crushed in an electoral landslide by President Nixon, and carried only one state. Republican analysts who are closely studying this year's voter turnout statistics point to similar cases in which the party with the highest primary turnout has been trounced in the election.

In 1988, for instance, after eight years of Ronald Reagan's presidency, frustrated Democrats flocked to the primaries, with a turnout rate that was twice that of Republicans. But Vice President George H. W. Bush easily defeated Gov. Michael Dukakis.

Add Feed to ZapTXT Add Feed to Bloglines Add Feed to Technorati Add Feed to LibWorm! Add Feed to My Yahoo! Add Feed to Google Add Feed to Newsgator Add Feed to Rojo Add Feed to Windows Live Add Feed to My MSN
Gonna Vote
By Parker - Florida Today * Posted 10/27/2004
Post to MySpace!
Comment
Email
Gonna Vote
© Copyright 2004  Parker - All Rights Reserved.

Posted By: Paula S  on Sunday, May 18, 2008

Extremely perceptive comments. I've been thinking this past week about it. I'm one of those faithful November voters who rarely votes in primaries. I made an exception this year, but it's been years since the last time I did so. I've also noticed, over the years, that many people who turn out for primaries seem to think they've done their job, and can comfortably stay home in November (when it really counts). It will be very interesting to see how many of these enthusiastic young people who have made a coronation for an inexperienced and unready candidate turn out in November. The likelihood they can overwhelm the throngs of older people who didn't bother with the primaries, but who are skeptical of Sen. Obama's readiness for the top job seems not that great to me. We have had the less than thrilling experience of living through the most recent outsider's performance there. What makes the senator - or his supporters - think we're willing to take another such chance on someone who sounds wonderful, but lacks a track record? The vast majority of media voices have enthusiastically formed a cadre of Sen. Obama's supporters. What they seem not to realize is that the public no longer trusts the media as we once did. Not a single one of them has even a tenth of the trust that people freely gave to Walter Cronkite.



I'm far from young now, but I try hard not to miss commentary by Daniel Schorr, NPR's 91 year old commentator (who is still sharp as a tack, though of a generation old enough to be my parents). He makes no bones of his political position, but I've never heard him utter an ugly word about anyone. If there is such a commentator among young journalists, I've not heard him or her - and I do watch for commentators I might be able to trust.



What's the point of my digression? The silent majority of American voters has not been heard from, and are unlikely to have been persuaded by the enthusiasms of today's media. I think they - and Obama's young followers - may be in for a surprise in November. And, regardless of what they think about it, then or now, most of those who vote against Sen. Obama will NOT be motivated by racism (though, to be sure, some will), but by his failure to convince us to take another chance on someone so inexperienced.

Make A Comment
We appreciate your feedback. Post a comment using the form below.
Your Name (required)
Your Comments
Type the characters you see in the image:

 





© Cagle Cartoons, Inc., All Rights Reserved; Artwork and Columns © each respective artist and writer.