Chris Bowers notes that self-identified Democrats were 76 percent of caucus-goers last night, barely changed from 79 percent in 2004. The dramatic increase in turnout, in short, did involve many new independents coming to the polls, but it was mostly achieved by mobilizing new self-identified Democrats.
« Make it 100 | Main | The Game Plan »
Who Are The New Voters
04 Jan 2008 09:32 am
Comments (16)
But, of course, in 2004, there wasn't a Republican caucus. The best comparison is 2000, when both parties caucused. Dems went from 59k then to over 220k now, where the Repubs went from 89k to 110k. (These numbers are highly approximate, based on something I read on Kos earlier today.)
That's an interesting spin by Bowers Matt. But my understanding is that unlike in New Hampshire, independents can't participate in the caucus as independents. They have to re-register as Democrats. So doesn't that mean that by the time these voters reach the caucus location and participate in an entrance poll, a good many independents may already have begun to self-identify as Democrats?
I heard last night that there were something like 130,000 Dem caucus-goers in 2004 and over 200,000 last night. 21% of 130,000 is 27,300 and 24% of 200,000 is 48,000. 48,000/27,300 is about 1.76. So, given the dramatic increase in total voters, the change from 79% self-identified Democrats to 76% self-identified Democrats represents a 76% increase in non-Democrats voting in the Democratic caucus. I would say that's rather huge. Democratic turnout increased as well, but only by 48% not 76%.
Petey is so fucking unbearable right now. Going around to every blog and spinning for Edwards.
"Petey is so fucking unbearable right now. Going around to every blog and spinning for Edwards."
Frankly, I don't think the generational aspect of what happened in Iowa is particularly helpful to any campaign, Edwards included. That's the reason why no one is really talking about it.
Petey is so fucking unbearable right now. Going around to every blog and spinning for Edwards.
My glee at Obama coming out ten points on top, was first and foremost driven by the extreme frowny-faces he drew all over the Clinton campaign. Next in line was the extreme displeasure it would bring Petey, not the Edwards campaign or Edwards, just Petey.
"Next in line was the extreme displeasure it would bring Petey, not the Edwards campaign or Edwards, just Petey."
Your scorn only empowers me, y'know.
Check out Obama's age demographics:
57% 17-29
42% 30-44
27% 45-64
18% 65 & up
Why has nobody pointed out that this adds up to 144%? That's a hell of a lot of rounding.
"Why has nobody pointed out that this adds up to 144%?"
The percentages are Obama's share of that cohort's vote, not of Obama's total vote.
Your scorn only empowers me, y'know.
And your empowerment, in turn, makes you even more scorned. And so the great wheel goes round...
Proud mary keep on burning.
The fact that Obama delivers the youth vote turnout woudl eman huge coattails. Most of these under 30s will be pulling the lever for the straight D tick all the way down to Dog Catcher.
Just one more plus for Obama in the general.
The fact that Obama delivers the youth vote turnout would mean huge coattails. Most of these under 30s will be pulling the lever for the straight D ticket all the way down to Dog Catcher.
Just one more plus for Obama in the general.
I felt sorry for Petey at first, but then he just told a guy to fuck off and die, and was forced to make a couple of [snarky] apologies. I still think he meant it.
Petey, I'm voting for Edwards come Feb., because I want him to stay in the race. But I feel really bad that he's got you to spin for him because you're one hell of an irritating little twerp right now and I have to take a break from blogs with you in it.
I am going to disagree with the others.
Petey is John Henry. Petey knows he can't beat the
the faster, newer Obama machine in the long run but he keeps hammering anyway. There is something admirable in the work no matter how annoying the sound is.
Petey,
Your scorn only empowers me, y'know.
I hate to tell you this. Edwards has always turned me off more than any of the other Dem candidates. But as for blog commenters, I like you, I really like you, I look for your comments.
(Not that I care which of the Dem candidates wins! I have decided: I don't care. They all have their upsides and downsides, none of them will be able to do what they say they want to do in the way they want to do it, and as to foreign policy, the world and the situation will have changed by the time the chosen is inaugurated. They are all good enough to handle it, all anti-Bush enough, and no matter what, each one will do things I disagree with, and personality quirks I don't like, and uses political op methods that I will tire of seeing.)
Comments closed January 18, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
FWIW, I think everyone is missing the real mechanism for what happened last night. It wasn't a turnout story. It was a generational election story.
Check out Obama's age demographics:
57% 17-29
42% 30-44
27% 45-64
18% 65 & up
The 57% figure is one of the damnedest things I've ever seen.
To put it into perspective, it means Obama came in third among the entire over-30 electorate and still won the caucuses easily.
That's more than slightly unusual.
He won the under-30's as a bloc, which I've never seen or read about anyone doing before.
Posted by Petey | January 4, 2008 9:53 AM