Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Elections Morning Digest: I'll bet Scott Brown wishes he could un-say this (158 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You're asking for a 10% increase in turnout? (0+ / 0-)

    I mean that's not an example, its a wish.  

    I'm not saying we can't make numerical calculations to direct us, but that's not even close to reasonable.  Texas has always had one of the worst voter turnouts.  2008 was a high point for Texas in terms of voter turnout in the last few cycles.  In 2008 it was 55.2%, 2010 32.9%, 2006 it was 30.6% and in 2004 it was 53.7%.

    If anything, the strategy should be to target non-presidential years for voter turnout, but moving to 65% is just beyond crazy.  

    •  Why is it so damn crazy? (0+ / 0-)

      I'm not asking to go from the low fifties to the high eighties. While it was just an example, it appears to be well within the range of reasonable figures. And while there's always a chance there's just something about the state that makes it so unmotivated, let's remember that unless I am forgetting something, it hasn't been competitive at the presidential level in decades. The mere fact that at least one side would be actively working the state, let alone both sides, is bound to increase turn out. There are plenty of counties where turn out increases by a significant degree, although some of it is kind of skewed because the base is low.

      By the way, let's remember that my assumptions were kind of strict. It's entirely possible that far less than 30 percent of the population in Harris County is illegal, if not likely, and if we adjust the numbers to reflect that, the voting pool becomes bigger, requiring a smaller percentage increase to get to an absolute figure. Let me also say I am talking about a specific county, not the state as a whole, although targeting the biggest counties would certainly push up.

      •  Key word here (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        it appears to be well within the range of reasonable figures. rdw never accused you of saying that voter turnout would be in the eighties, so that is a straw man argument. Honestly, I don't find an argument convincing just because you take 5-10% modifications and assume that they are possible simply because they look marginal. For instance, I could argue that Mississippi is competitive because it's totally reasonable to assume he could get 20% of the white vote instead of 10%, right? But there is very little evidence that any Democrat not named Jim Hood has actually gotten that much of the white vote recently, and certainly not any Democrat who is as far to the left of Mississippi as Obama is.

        Sorry, dude, but I think you need to go another route with this.

        21, male, RI-01 (voting) IL-01 (college), hopeless Swingnut

        by sapelcovits on Wed Dec 21, 2011 at 11:05:18 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  10% is like 1.5 million voters statewide (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        That is crazy.  Sorry, it just is.  

        Also, competitiveness does not always make a strong correlation with voter turnout.  Nevada in 2008 only saw like a 3% turnout increase over 2004, even though it was infinitely more competitive and more in-focus for multiple important races than.

        So I'd say being heavily competed can give a max of 3%.  I don't know how you get to 10% from there, even in just focusing on smaller areas like Harris county.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site