SaintLouisBlues
(755 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-04 03:10 PM
Original message |
MO Democratic Primary: Record Turnout Afterall; Up 58% from 2000 |
|
Local talking heads spoke of low turnout here. Turns out it was Republicans that had the low turnout. This from yesterdays Post-Dispatch: -snip- Since Tuesday's results, state and local election officials have focused on the low turnout - 15 percent statewide. But in fact, the Democratic turnout was much higher. The 418,545 votes were almost 58 percent more than the number cast four years ago, when Al Gore battled Bill Bradley, a Crystal City native who emphasized his Missouri roots.
Kerry, a senator from Massachusetts, received 211,737 votes Tuesday in Missouri's primary. That's 40,000 more votes than Gore received in his winning effort four years ago. Tuesday's Democratic turnout was even higher than in 1988, when Missouri held its first presidential primary to help its favorite son, Rep. Richard Gephardt, in his first White House bid.
Overall turnout was down in Missouri because many Republicans stayed home, since President George W. Bush had no major opposition in their party's primary. -snip- www.stltoday.com
This despite the fact that there was no campaigning here to speak of. No one seemed to be paying too much attention after Gephardt dropped out, yet up 58%!
More bad news for the radical right.
|
JuniorPlankton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-04 03:14 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Comparison to 1992, though, would be more relevant. |
LSdemocrat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-04 03:15 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Actually 2000 was the first primary |
|
Edited on Fri Feb-06-04 03:17 PM by LSdemocrat
Missouri had a caucus system before 2000. And by the time the primary occured in 2000, Bradley had already dropped out, so there really was no reason for people to come out.
ON EDIT: Clarifying my point.
|
SaintLouisBlues
(755 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-04 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. Wrong on both counts, according to this article. |
|
1988 was MO's first primary. Changed from caucus to help hype Gephardt's campaign. Also, Bradley had not dropped out, again as per this article. Direct link: http://tinyurl.com/3f5q3
|
NewYorkerfromMass
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-04 03:25 PM
Response to Original message |
3. New Mexico got twice what they expected |
|
Democratic Party officials now say more than 106,000 people voted, a volume that stunned party officials, who had expected about 50,000 Democrats to turn out. http://www.abqtrib.com/archives/news04/020604_news_delegate.shtml
|
sallyseven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-04 03:26 PM
Response to Original message |
4. No matter who you're for |
|
the democratic base is energized. I'll bet bush is having a cow. That is if they are telling him. He doesn't read the paper. This information does not appear on video games. So maybe he doesn't know. Maybe that is why he nominated those people like McCain and Silberman to that panel. Do they subpoena power?
|
mzmolly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-04 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. I agree, Bush is gone... I think that's a given. Rethugs always fall in |
|
line, Dems don't. I think this year you'll see something different.
I think Bush is gonna get creamed.
|
Mayberry Machiavelli
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-04 06:09 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Go Go Go You Fired Up Democratic Voters!!!
|
Feanorcurufinwe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-04 06:19 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Record turnout and Kerry receives more than 50% of the vote |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 02nd 2024, 04:47 AM
Response to Original message |