UPDATE: Nope, it didn't.
See the update with an unpublished PPP poll at the bottom of this diary...
These facts refute speculation in other diaries posted today.
Data from the Pueblo County Clerk's Office.
Calculations and conclusions by me.
|Tuesday's Grand Total||7,121|
|Early (%)||Tuesday (%)|
|∆||+4,154 Yes||+12.02 Yes|
- For every 1 Republican who voted, 1.43 Democrats voted. 4,619 more Democrats voted than Republicans. Thus, it is highly unlikely that inadequate Democratic turnout decided Pueblo's election.
- Early voting benefited Democrats and Republicans equally. More R's may have voted earlier than normal due to high motivation. Some Unaffiliateds may have waited 'till the last day to decide. Furthermore:
- Early voting increases turnout. Duhh. Pueblo's County Clerk, a Democrat, started voting as early as he possibly could, given the legal issues that slowed ballot printing. He also had plenty of locations, and used a mailed yellow card, with locations & hours printed on it, as valid voter ID (much to the chagrin of Republicans).
- Voter suppression decreases turnout. Duhh. Morse's election had a much smaller overall turnout than Giron's in Pueblo. Morse's district is overseen by the El Paso County Clerk, who is a Republican, and who had a shorter early voting period, very complex rules for casting an absentee ballot, and only one polling place actually in Morse's district. The rest were scattered through Colorado Springs. He gets a big elephant hug today, because Morse lost his election by two freakin' percent.
- Mail-in ballots increase turnout. Stopping mail-in ballots is Voter Suppression. An underhanded and sneakily-timed lawsuit prevented this election from being an all mail-in election. (Opening a bunch of polling places also cost the county more money.)
- Giron lost by 12%. Morse lost by TWO percent. In a district with active voter suppression, 40% Unaffiliated voters, and a slim Democratic voter enrollment advantage over Republicans, he lost by a mere TWO PERCENT. On the other hand, in a very blue district, with good early voting, a significant advantage in Democratic voter turnout, only 20% Unaffiliateds to worry about, and a sizable spending advantage, Giron lost by a whopping TWELVE percent.
We need an explanation for this. Not based on speculation, or someone's idle pet theories, but one based on citable, provable facts. Like the stats I provided in the tables.
We must learn from losses. Fact-less speculation results in the wrong lessons learned.
UPDATE 21:15 MST 11Sep13
A comment by "TeaBaggersAreRacists", below, tipped me off to a PPP poll from this weekend in CO Senate District 3 that they decided not to publish.
The crosstabs look to be very enlightening. One point that jumps out is that, like the Quinnipiac poll from a couple of weeks ago told us, voters tend to approve of most of the gun control measures, but don't like "gun control", and this PPP poll tells us that they favor the NRA.
This is EXACTLY the same Democratic messaging fail from health care. Voters like each part of the ACA, but they hate hate hate "Obamacare".
So it looks like the Democratic campaigns failed by explicitly avoiding the (chuckle) elephant in the room and refusing to directly address each of the measures they voted for (which were popular, individually). By ceding the "gun control" message to the NRA/recallers, by talking about everything but, they snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
At a first glance, the fact-based message here seems to be:
If you believe you are right, don't be a coward. Stand up for your principles. Explain yourself.
If Obamacare is to succeed, the Democrats, all the way up to the President, had better learn this lesson.
Likewise if the D's intend to compete in 2014.
Cowardice does not sell.
In the morning, I'll decide if I should update this diary with the PPP poll, write a new diary about it, or pass because kos did it before I woke up...