The friggin truth about Ct vote we ALL have to deal with. 10%Turnout!

[Perky]

.S. Senate - - Dem Primary
713 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 95.32%
Name Party Votes Pct
Lamont, Ned Dem 138,836 51.92
Lieberman, Joe (i) Dem 128,566 48.08

Less than 280,00 votes will be cast.

300,000 votes combined

with a state voting age population of about 3,000,000

— Population: 3,405,565 ; 29th, 12/00
According to http://www.50states.com/connecti.htm - More sources »


10% is the way I see it.

This is not a mandate on the war or Joe or Ned or anyone.

For all the bluster on DU about this being a watershed event... Not much of a turnout occurred.


What does that say about our on myopic view of the world.

[hatrack]

1. Well, American voter turnout generally sucks eggs

On balance, I'LL TAKE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Perky]

Ya just don;t get it do ya???

The turnout for this purportedly critical race is pathetic. We are hust so friggin insulated on this site that we fail to realize that we have serious problems with base if this is all the war/antiwar debated can generate in the real world.


IT SUCKS.

[Greyhound]

12. Perky, I for one (apparently the only one) see your point.

While 50% is much higher than we have come to expect, it is shameful. You might want to give this series a read, if you haven't already. It's the best work of it's kind that I have seen, it's called "The Politics of Definition" and offers a workable strategy to actually capitalize on Dr. Dean's 50 State campaign.

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11435
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11443
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11449
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11455

Yes it is long, but real solutions are rarely simple quick fixes. Please let me know what you think.

[Perky]

2. dupe

The turnout for this purportedly critical race is pathetic. We are hust so friggin insulated on this site that we fail to realize that we have serious problems with base if this is all the war/antiwar debated can generate in the real world.


IT SUCKS.

[Perky]

3. dupe

The turnout for this purportedly critical race is pathetic. We are hust so friggin insulated on this site that we fail to realize that we have serious problems with base if this is all the war/antiwar debated can generate in the real world.


IT SUCKS.

[Perky]

29. Good grief One in five voting age adults in CT are Registered DEMS

We should get off our fat pontifficationg tinfoil asses (mine tooo) and get out and register new voters.

[Beetwasher]

30. So Now You're Backpedaling and Just Making Up Statistics?

What is it about the words HISTORIC TURNOUT you fail to understand?

[Perky]

35. I never said it was not hstoric

ANd I would have voted for Lamont if I live there. I am sayong that even if was 55% turnout od Dems. that mesns there are only roughly 570K registeed dems in the stats.

I am still goint say that that number sux.
570k out of of 2,800,000 sux.

[Beetwasher]

77. Bullshit, That's Not What You Said

It may be what you're saying NOW, but that's not what your OP said. It's called backpedaling.

[Beetwasher]

4. BULLFUCKING SHIT!!!! There Was HISTORIC TURNOUT!!!! 50%!!!!!!!

That's historic and unprecedented. WTF are you talking about?

http://www.dailykos.com/

"Well, we got a blockbuster primary turnout. While only about 3 percent of Democrats voted in the Virginia primary a few weeks ago, about 50 percent will have participated today. That's an incredible number -- unprecedented -- for a Senate primary. I'll leave others to do the historical research, but this isn't normal. This is what people-power looks like, and it is changing the face of politics"

Seriously, WTF are you talking about? This was an amazing victory.

[Perky]

6. Unnmm know try doing the math

300,000 votes combined

with a state coting age population of about 3,000,000

— Population: 3,405,565 ; 29th, 12/00
According to http://www.50states.com/connecti.htm - More sources »


10% is the way I see it.

[trumad]

7. 50 percent is incredible

you need some sleep pal///

[Perky]

9. How do You get 50%????

[Beetwasher]

19. Einstein, It's Not Total Voters

It's a Dem primary. :eyes:

[Beetwasher]

18. Umm, Einstein, It's a DEM PRIMARY

It's not total registered voters.:eyes:

Take it up w/ Kos, I'll take HIS word over yours any day.

[colorado thinker]

23. 50% of registered Democrats

turned out . . . you are looking at the total population, Republicans and independents don't vote in Democratic primaries.

[blonndee]

25. THAT is an incredible turnout. n/t

[readmoreoften]

65. Also children and teens don't vote. Neither do prisoners. /nt

[lonestarnot]

15. Thank you! I heard 55%

[ThomWV]

5. What You Have To Know Is What The Relative Turnout Was

If a normal off year primary only draws 35% or so of the registered voters then its big news when you see one like this draw 50% or more.

I'm not saying those are the right numbers. only that it is the relative numbers that count. You can look them up yourself, I'm not sure where to even look.

[Cleita]

8. Your candidate lost. Get over it. n/t

[Perky]

10. My candidate is the democratic nominee whoever that is n/t

JOe should go sit down.

[Cleita]

16. Fair enough. I have to hold my nose in November

and vote for Dianne Feinstein again.

[MzNov]

11. Did you take the same math course as Rummy?? nt

[colorado thinker]

45. Hee,hee

Amusing . . .

[lonestarnot]

13. Nope you are wrong. Turnout was way higher than 10% closer

to 55% of registered voters!

[Perky]

24. 10% of voting population = 55% of registered Dems?

So you are saying that the Democratic PArt as a whole has regisered ony one in five voters? That still sux given all the fire I haere about this Lieberman on DU

We should get off oun fat asses and get out there anr register people to vote.

[Beetwasher]

28. Can't Admit You're Wrong, Huh?

How Lieberman-esque of you....:eyes:

50% turnout in a primary is HISTORIC. What is it about HISTORIC that you fail to understand?

[lonestarnot]

34. What in the fuck are you talking about?

How many people have you registered?

[Perky]

39. 2 years ago I registered close to 900 . lifetime about 12000 dems

How about you?

[lonestarnot]

41. I've registered my share. You're doing a great job! Get back out

there!

[Perky]

43. Thank you

[GardeningGal]

14. Wow

So you're claiming that all of the voting age adults in CT are not only registered voters, but they are registered as Democrats. How do you arrive at that?

[Catchawave]

17. See my sig line.....

"We", cough, Virginia, eeked out our Dem Senate Candidate against George Felix Allen, with a "minus 6%" turn out at the polls in June.

Damn right we'll take it, it's the Amurikan way :hi:

:sarcasm:

[Mugu]

20. Buzz Kill

But your point is well taken.

[Beetwasher]

22. He Has No Point, He's Full Of Shit

Turnout was historic. Over 50%.

[Mugu]

32. Feel free to beat me up after the general election.

I just have a bad feeling.

Regards,

Mugu

[long_green]

21. You couldn't possibly be trying any harder to support Lieberman

Three million voters means a turnout, in presidential election years, of about 55% TOPS. In an off year, we're talking more like 40% (1.2 million of your three million). They are, of course, not all Democrats. What happened tonight almost never happens, we're talking fractions of one percent here. Keep trying.

[Mr_Spock]

26. This is a watershed event

And you have NO idea what you are talking about.

What a shame we have to read this crap on such a great day in politics.

[calico1]

27. This is a Democratic primary.

Every eligible voter does not get to vote..only Democrats. No Republicans, no non affiliated. Primay turnout is always tend to much lower than a general election. The turnout for this primary much higher than normal. So it was a good turnout.

[Spider Jerusalem]

31. 2.1 million registered voters in CT. About 600K of those are Democrats.

So turnout for this election, among REGISTERED DEMOCRATIC VOTERS, was nearly 50%.

You obviously don't know what the hell you're talking about. You should try informing yourself of the facts before spouting nonsense.

[long_green]

33. So much for the "3 Million" that led off this thread.

Adjust my numbers to presidential election turnout of 1.1 million and an off-year (this year) turnout of 840k. Yep, totally insignificant result.

[Perky]

36. 3Million was voting age adults not registered voters

[long_green]

38. You're quite right. Why did you cite it, then?

nm

[Perky]

40. To say wha I meant. WE ARE NOT REGISTERING NEARLY ENOUGH PEOPLE

[long_green]

50. It took a while for that to come out

Normally, someone like Lieberman would be unopposed in the primary. Then, he would win the general election (considering the extreme weakness of the GOP challenger) by three to one at least. To say this wasn't a demonstration of strength for our side is to ignore an avalanche of data that says Lieberman was unbeatable. It was close, fine. It will still be easier for the next guy.

[Perky]

55. Not if Jo runs as an indy.

I suspect that he will win.. because the repuke
es will vote for Lieberman more tha than fo their their own guy.

General election is a pick-em with a slight nod to the independent.

[long_green]

58. This was before Lamont beat him. It's a different race now.

Established Dems from all over the country can start calling for Joe to bail out. It will be an uncomfortable couple of weeks for him. Lamont will raise tons of $. Lieberman of course, can raise $ but any national cash he raises is diverted from close races all over the country. In short, he will be detracting from the overall effort to recapture Congress.
Joe Lieberman thinks he is more important than the entire Democratic Party, not just the voters in Connecticut who rejected him.
THAT is why he's about to get piled on.

[bornskeptic]

67. 3 million is way high.

At least a quarter of the population is going to be underage or noncitizen, so the number of eligible voters is probably about 2.5-2.6 million.

[Perky]

71. Non citizens are elgible to vote.

[sandnsea]

49. Do you have the other numbers?

That seems like a very low number of Dems in CT.

[Perky]

51. YEP it does seem low

and that was my reasonb for the OP.

[Spider Jerusalem]

59. THat's per NYT article of a few weeks ago (now in archive, unfortunately).

Don't have numbers on registered Republicans and independents, right offhand, but since registering as a member of a party only matters in the primary and not the general election, and primaries (generally) have rather low turnout, there are certainly a lot more people who vote Democratic (but just aren't registered as such).

[sandnsea]

75. I was just surprised is all

I'd have thought there would have been more actual registered Dems in a northeastern state. I think that's a lower percentage than a lot of "red" states have. Glad they vote Dem in the GE, but it would be nice if they felt comfortable enough to actually register Dem.

[hfojvt]

76. that is still kinda troubling

First, I thought Connecticut was supposed to be a Democratic state. That there's no way the Republican could beat either Lieberman or Lamont. So if 1.5 million people are non-Democrats, can Lamont win this fall? Do we have an idea of how the independents will break? How many of the 2.1 million are registered Republicans?

[bridgit]

37. i keep telling everyone here, apathy is very much in vouge...

but nobody listens :cry: VOTE already will'ya!!! sheesh!

[colorado thinker]

42. Now, everybody just calm down

Many, many non-affiliated voters vote Democrat. I was an unaffiliated voter until 2000, when I registered as a Democrat so I could vote in the primary. I voted Democrat almost exclusively for 25 years, yet I was unaffiliated. (Occasionally voted for a local republican I could believe in, but always Democrat in national races). Normally, only the hard core truly smitten vote in primaries, many other registered Democrats have not, historically. THAT is why this turnout of 50% of registered Democrats voting in this primary is historic, and unprecedented.


Register voters, by all means, but don't consider it a failure if they don't declare an affiliation.

This was monstrously good!

[barb162]

44. results by county, 203,000 voters so far

http://www.statementofvote-sots.ct.gov/StatementOfVote/WebModules/ReportsLink/USSenCountyView.aspx?Parameter=08/08/2006-Primary

[calico1]

47. Interesting. Lieberman won

one county.

[Renew Deal]

46. Only registered Democrats can vote.

It's over 50%

[Perky]

48. And I am saying that the registration level is lousy

only one in five voter is CT are registered Dems. This was a great opportunity to get new voters to the polls because of the issues in the race and no on capitalized on this perfect storm to register a couple of hundred thousand new DEMs.


edit for typos

[colorado thinker]

52. Did you read my previous post?

The number of registered DEMOCRATS is not the goal - the number of registered Democrats and unaffiliated voters that we can convince to vote Democrat is the goal!

[Renew Deal]

54. Spell check is your friend

What the hell did you say?

[Perky]

56. I fixed thanks

[Renew Deal]

60. Weren't there over 11,000 new Democratic registrations in the last month?

That's pretty good.

[Perky]

68. The stats will tell you that abiut 30% of those probably voted.

We tend to registed thopse that are apathetice rather than those who have a greater propensity to vot.

[Renew Deal]

74. Are you just making this stuff up?

They registered just before an election because they didn't care? That's makes no sense.

[barb162]

53. Connecticut has a voter-eligible population of roughly 2.4 million.

If this is correct....

snip Connecticut has a voter-eligible population of roughly 2.4 million. The Connecticut Secretary of State reports 1.95 million active registered voters as of last year, of whom 653,055 were registered as Democrats. Just as a benchmark, consider that if 25% of registered Democrats cast a ballot on August 8, that level of turnout would amount to roughly 7% of the voter eligible population and roughly 8% of all registered voters. snip
http://www.mysterypollster.com/main/2006/07/connecticut_pri.html

[Perky]

57. And only 55% of thos voted.

[colorado thinker]

61. Sorry, my dear, I'm giving up

You refuse to see the real facts here. The real issue is how out of the total number of registered voters in Connecticut, how many are affiliated as Democrats, how many are affiliated as Republicans and how many are unaffiliated??? November is the prize. This was really just an opportunity to scare Republicans and slap the DLC in the face.

What we want are the vast number of unaffiliated voters to swing Democratic in November. You can go out and get them to change their affiliation, yes indeed. But spend some of your apparently considerable energy and rage to convince the unconvinced to (1) vote and (2) vote Democrat in November!

[Iniquitous Bunny]

62. The dude needs to take Statistics 101.

:eyes:

[Perky]

64. I have registered12,000 dems in my lifetime

I know the issue involved with registration this was a issed opportunity to find nes voters for the party which honestly is even more important thean unaffiliated.

YOU win elections when you increase the base. not when you attract the unaffiliated on a one-off

[barb162]

63. I read somewhere that 7000 independents registered as

Democrats for this primary. I looked at your numbers above indicating this is just about a few hundred thousand voters. Don't know what to make of it all yet other than Lieberman conceded etc. But if most people in the state are Republican or Independent, if Lieberman does run as an Independent, no telling what would happen in November, is there. I'd like to see some polling/sampling in a few weeks about what ALL the State- wide LIKELY voters would do.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

66. God I Hate When Ignorant People Rant In A Whine Completely Absent Of Fact.

50% voter turnout = historic record breaking turnout.

Please get your facts straight before you go off on a defeatist rant. T'would be much appreciated.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

69. Oh but that would be so much not in the mode of throwing cold water on

the party.

[Perky]

Yes 55% of the 20% of the voting age population

That is 11 % of the potential voters.

On 1 in 5 people in connectcut are DEMs. and only half of them voted

[Perky]

70. Yes 55% of the 20% of the voting age population

That is 11 % of the potential voters.

On 1 in 5 people in connectcut are DEMs. and only half of them voted

[fishwax]

72. Well, the way you see it is demonstrably wrong. Turnout was much higher

There are 2.4 million registered voters in Connecticut, but most of them are registered as either republicans or as unaffiliated voters, making them ineligible to vote in the lamont/lieberman race.

There are about 653,000 registered democrats in the state. About 280,000 of them voted in yesterday's election, for a turnout of about 43 percent.

[Richard Steele]

73. No silver lining without a cloud, Perky?

C'mon, I understand what you are saying, and there's some truth to it,
but I don't understand what you thought (or hoped) was gonna happen
that didn't.

This was an AMAZING achievment by Lamont today; but you are here
focused on the fact that it wasn't amazing ENOUGH?

Focus on WHAT HAPPENED, not what DIDN'T.
Because what DIDN'T ain't ever gonna,
and what DID is pretty damn sweet.

[meganmonkey]

78. At least a third of voters (IIRC) are not affiliated with either party

so why would they vote in the Democratic primary?

And many previous voters who are affiliated with one or the other party gave up on them and generally don't vote at all, let alone in promaries.

Your numbers are stretched far beyond the reasonable.

Keep digging.

[bleedingheart]

79. Hmmm....that population stat includes children who can't vote

so...let us say that about 40% of the state's population is children...you are down to...

2040000

Then estimate that of the eligible adults only about 60% are registered.

So about 1,224,000 are voters.

of those...if it is true...about 60% are democrats...

about 734,400

at about half turning out you would have 367,200...and that is very close to the real stats....

All my "stats" are guess work...so let me explain to you that when they state a 50% turnout...they aren't lying. They know the figures for how many people are registered in each precinct...just like how I know the voting history of my own precinct...a pathetic 25% vote of those who are registered generally...