Go to Original
Flip Side of Democrats' Spat: Higher Turnout
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post
Wednesday 26 March 2008
The conventional wisdom that a prolonged race for the Democratic presidential
nomination between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton is bad news
for their party may be turning on its head.
Figures released by Pennsylvania's Department of State on Monday night showed
that Democrats have topped 4 million registered voters, the first time either
party in the state has crossed that threshold. Democrats have added 161,000
to their rolls, a gain of about 4 percent; Republican registration has dipped
about 1 percent, to 3.2 million.
That is consistent with the pattern since the beginning of the year: Democratic
turnout in primaries and caucuses has topped Republican turnout, often by huge
differences.
In Ohio, 2.2 million voters participated in the Democratic primary, compared
with 1.1 million in the Republican primary. In Texas, 2.9 million voters turned
out for the Democratic primary and 1.4 million for the GOP primary. Even in
Florida, where the Republican primary was one of the most hotly contested of
the year and the Democratic primary featured no active campaigning by the candidates,
GOP turnout was only marginally higher: 1.9 million vs. 1.7 million.
These turnout figures match what pollsters have found as they have surveyed
the electorate throughout the year: The gap between Democratic and Republican
identification has grown dramatically.
The Pew Research Center offered fresh evidence of this last week with a report
that aggregated interviews with 5,566 voters during the first two months of
the year. It found that 36 percent of respondents identified themselves as Democrats
and 27 percent called themselves Republicans, a drop of 6 percentage points
since the 2004 election. The report noted that, on an annualized basis, this
is the lowest GOP identification in 16 years of surveys.
It's not that Democratic identification is up so much as Republican registration
is down. But among independents, Pew reported, there is now a decided advantage
for Democrats. Far more of these independents say they tilt toward the Democratic
Party than toward the GOP. When all the figures are put together - hard-core
party identifiers and "leaners" - Democrats have an edge of 51 percent
to 37 percent, and that's up three points just in the last year.
What all this means is that the combination of dissatisfaction with President
Bush, a diminished Republican brand and a compelling contest for the Democratic
presidential nomination has created a huge pool of voters for the eventual nominee
- and other Democratic candidates - to go after in the fall.
Mark Gersh, who runs the National Center for an Effective Congress, which has
long done some of the best political analysis of the overall electorate for
the Democratic leadership, has produced figures that demonstrate the implications
below the level of the presidential race.
Gersh has been tracking voter turnout in some of the most competitive congressional
districts around the country. "In marginal districts, where we have reliable
compilations of total vote, Democratic turnout has far exceeded Republican turnout,
even in districts with Republican leanings," he wrote.
Some examples: In Wisconsin's 8th District, where Democrat Steve Kagen won
a tight race in 2006 in what had been a GOP district, 127,000 Democrats turned
out for the Feb. 19 primary, compared with 56,000 Republicans. In Ohio's 1st
District, represented by Republican Steve Chabot, 47,000 Republicans turned
out on March 4, compared with 107,000 Democrats. That last figure represents
more voters than Chabot or his rival attracted in the 2006 general election,
and 9,000 fewer votes than the Democratic candidate in that district captured
in the 2004 general election.
When the general election arrives, Democrats will have voter lists far larger
than they ever imagined and will have to spend far less money than in past years
identifying these voters. That will affect every candidate up and down the ballot.
Some Democratic strategists worry that a protracted nomination battle will
put the nominee months behind in putting state organizations into place for
the general election. That's a real issue, given that in recent cycles, Democratic
and Republican nominees could name their state teams in the late spring and
get them moving by early summer.
But the Democratic race may be producing an even more valuable asset for the
fall, particularly when compared with Republican John McCain's campaign. By
the time this race is over, Clinton and Obama will have competed in almost every
state (Michigan and Florida being two potentially costly exceptions). The Democratic
candidates have been forced to organize these states in the winter and spring.
They have identified and trained legions of organizers. They will know which
of their state coordinators are the best, and many of those staffers will already
be familiar with some battleground states for the fall.
That, too, is a contrast with past races. When nomination battles end quickly,
candidates begin the general-election campaign having had little direct experience
with many states critical to winning the presidency. They have spent little
time campaigning in those states, and their teams have to start almost from
scratch.
That is the problem McCain faces. His campaign, strapped for cash and struggling
to stay alive, is far behind both Obama and Clinton in developing state-by-state
operations. He certainly has the luxury of time now to get that process going,
and Republicans have done an exceptional job in recent elections in finding,
wooing and turning out their voters. But there is no question that he starts
in a deep hole, given what seems to be a more demoralized GOP electorate.
Unless the Obama-Clinton contest turns far nastier than it has already, or
ends in a way that seems demonstrably unfair to a portion of the Democratic
electorate, the Democrats should benefit from this competition.
-------
Jump to today's Truthout Features:
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.
Print This Story
E-mail This Story