Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Admiral Loinpresser

(3,859 posts)
25. I call extreme bullshit!
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:59 AM
Feb 2016

Based on examining wiki and other data and adding up tabulated Dem NH votes for individuals here are the rounded counts I get for Dem votes cast in NH since 1992.

1992 168k
1996 65k (rough estimate)
2000 147k
2004 220k
2008 287k
2012 49k
2016 251k

Important trends to note: voter turnout has generally been on the decline since at least 1972.

http://journalistsresource.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Voter-Turnout-in-Presidential-Primaries-and-Caucuses_Patterson.pdf

This uptick in voter turnout in 2004 and 2008 (record year) has a clear major determinant: historically extreme Dem voter antipathy for George W. Bush.

Another determinant for high turnout in 2008 was young voter appeal for President Obama. Another factor in 2008 was that after eight years of GOP occupation of the WH, history indicated a change to a Dem president, which led to a vast number of Dem candidates, all with tail-wind GOTV efforts. But clearly the biggest factor was George W. Bush. In 2008, HRC won NH, so high turnout can in no way be completely attributed to Obama, but rather the over-arching determinant was the historically rare repugnance of Dem voters for Bush.

The 2016 turnout is second only to the anomalous 2008 turnout and DESPITE eight years of a very popular (for registered Dems) Dem president in the WH. The most obvious reasons for high Dem voter turnout in 2016 are a feeling that America has been on the wrong track for decades, in terms of a corrupt electoral system, a quagmire foreign policy in the Middle East and most importantly stagnant wages and wealth inequality. The 2016 result indicates a paradox: while Dem popularity of President Obama is very high, a great number of independent, Dem (and indeed GOP) voters are angry and dissatisfied with the American status quo.

So by any objective standard, a Dem turnout of 251k in NH is fairly characterized as “huge.” Rachel is often very good, but she also plays it fast and loose on occasion, as does every other pundit and “journalist” in the corporate media, almost without exception. To claim that the record turnout of 2008 somehow diminishes the historic result in 2016 is not supported by reasonable analysis. If she said what you claim she said, I give her a big Pinocchio on this one.

Bernie got significantly more votes in the NH primary than anyone else in either party in any year jfern Feb 2016 #1
Hey JFern! Matariki Feb 2016 #2
That's because there are so many GOP candidates Cali_Democrat Feb 2016 #6
But he also beat Obama 2008, Hillary 2008, and Hillary 2016 jfern Feb 2016 #7
I'll have to thank Rachel for the poli-sci lecture. Wilms Feb 2016 #10
I'll second that swilton Feb 2016 #16
Correct. To now blame him for low turnout is beyond pathetic. Boo, Rachel! delrem Feb 2016 #22
She did not blame him for low turnout. You just made that up. She merely pointed that riversedge Feb 2016 #28
False. Dem turnout was extremely high. See post #25. n/t Admiral Loinpresser Feb 2016 #30
New Hampshire was actually down over 35,000 votes, despite the fact that the New Hampshire populatio riversedge Feb 2016 #31
Please see and address post #25. n/t Admiral Loinpresser Feb 2016 #37
The Obam Year Was An Anomoly... What Is The Average for the past 3-4 Primary elections? CorporatistNation Feb 2016 #42
2016 was 2nd place for Democratic turnout ever jfern Feb 2016 #45
Nobody has ever gotten more votes SheenaR Feb 2016 #3
And failed to mention media coverage... TTUBatfan2008 Feb 2016 #4
Hillary recieved negative coverage which you fail to mention riversedge Feb 2016 #26
Trump's coverage was very negative too TTUBatfan2008 Feb 2016 #33
Hey Rachel, what do you think the turnout would have been without Bernie? Notice how many Skwmom Feb 2016 #5
Rachael conveniently 'forgot' to mention the INDEPENDENTS that turned out 99th_Monkey Feb 2016 #8
He said that in his NH victory speech while some precincts hadn't reported yet. Eric J in MN Feb 2016 #9
Maddow showed a montage of Bernie claiming he is electible because he will bring in new voters. riversedge Feb 2016 #27
It's not Bernie's fault that nobody likes Clinton. mhatrw Feb 2016 #11
Oh, come on! Hillary is EXTREMELY POPULAR Hortensis Feb 2016 #29
There Ya Go!!!! Rachel Is A SHILL FOR HillBill! CorporatistNation Feb 2016 #43
Could it be he did bring more in Paulie Feb 2016 #12
Ummmmmm...both things can be true! Doesn't mean Sanders is lying. CoffeeCat Feb 2016 #13
No, everything Bernie said was accurate. Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #14
Math must not be Rachel's strong suit! Bernblu Feb 2016 #15
Thanks for posting this. The proper way to look at it ... ThePhilosopher04 Feb 2016 #19
Good point. More people turned out to vote for certain candidate than ever before in NH primary Eric J in MN Feb 2016 #34
Bernie smashed the NH Primary record for number of votes ... ThePhilosopher04 Feb 2016 #17
The real issue that the OP does not pay sadoldgirl Feb 2016 #18
There was enough turnout to beat Clinton by 20 points. He has the most enthusiastic supporters. californiabernin Feb 2016 #20
Another caustic OP. If it were scented and packaged, it could be used to clean toilet bowls. nt TheBlackAdder Feb 2016 #21
It has something to do with toilet bowls I'll grant you Fumesucker Feb 2016 #23
I think what everyone is missing, numbers wise, is the uniqueness of the 2008 election. Vinca Feb 2016 #24
and i suspect a lot of people turned out to vote specifically against Obama PaulaFarrell Feb 2016 #36
I call extreme bullshit! Admiral Loinpresser Feb 2016 #25
+1. Second highest Dem turnout is still a big deal. (nt) PotatoChip Feb 2016 #38
Not good enough. Republicans still had lots more than Dems. riversedge Feb 2016 #39
NH has more registered R's then D's. PotatoChip Feb 2016 #40
More bullshit. Admiral Loinpresser Feb 2016 #41
UnRec RiverLover Feb 2016 #32
As I've said before ... people are starting to PAY ATTENTION. NurseJackie Feb 2016 #35
Yes, I saw it. fun n serious Feb 2016 #44
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Anyone catch the Rachel M...»Reply #25