Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, May 16, 2008
Donald Lambro :: Townhall.com Columnist
Primary Turnout Claims Turn Out To Be Half-Baked
by Donald Lambro
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


About the time the DNC's memo was being circulated, a study by two academics ripped the Democrats' specious claims asunder. "Our findings show that no matter which party has the edge in nomination contest turnout, there is no resultant advantage in the general election for that party," writes Leonard Williams, a political science professor at Indiana's Manchester College, and Neil Wollman, a senior fellow at Bentley College in Massachusetts.

Going back several decades, the learned duo found no partisan advantage between primary turnout and the outcome in a general election, a rule that "holds true regardless of the region of the country examined and regardless of the time period studied."

"We are not trying to make any prediction about what will happen this year. What we are trying to do is test the conventional wisdom that we've seen in a number of news accounts that higher turnout for the Democrats is an indicator that they will win in the fall," Williams told me. "Our study shows, well, maybe, but don't get your hopes up. There is no necessary relationship between the two." he said.

The DNC also points to the estimated 3.5 million new voters recently registered, including voters who "are changing their party registration to participate in the Democratic primaries and caucuses" as further evidence of their party's growing strength. But Gans says, "I don't trust that figure. I don't know what it means in terms of population growth and a whole series of other things" that won't be clear until later in the year.

It was once believed that higher voter registration and turnout was bad for Republicans and good for Democrats, but that superstition has been disproved as well.

Still, Gans cautions that "there is a correlation" between recessions, the belief that the country is on the wrong track, and election turnout. With skyrocketing gas prices and higher food costs, "I would be shocked if we did not have a higher turnout this fall," he said.

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | < Previous
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Donald Lambro is chief political correspondent for The Washington Times.

Be the first to read Donald Lambro's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Eon
These first time voters,are young people who don't want to be "Drafted".In fact this election may prove to be the most unpredictable of all.The war in Viet-Nam brought people to the polls,because it was a no win situation.This general election will have a "Fine Point" to it.The more people to vote, makes our country healthy."US" can't complain about that...

No real correlation
can be made on either side, simply because of the fundamental difference between primaries and general elections.

In primaries, the "party faithful" turn out on both sides, determined to see that "their guy" (or in the Hillary-huggers' case, "girl") gets nominated. This is done to drive their party in a specific direction, as per Reagan's observation in 1980 that you can always spot a Democratic motorcade because it only turns left. This is why both parties have become increasingly partisan. Which I regard as a good thing- it's preferable to having "choices" that are to all intents and purposes indistinguishable from each other- which is how the Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006.

But when you get to the general election, it's a different story. There, anyone with an interest, on any side, may be motivated to show up at the polling place, which means the results are far less predictable. As much as anything else, the Democratic loss of Congress in 1994 can be attributed to the fact that their diving turn to the left under the Clintons "energized" (or more exactly, "p***ed off") a lot of people who didn't normally bother to vote. That year, there was no noticeable "bulge" in primary turnout; the "faithful" on both sides showed up then- and everyone else showed up in November.

Oh, and here's a fun trivia fact; the election that statistically showed the biggest "bulge" in primary voting for the GOP was in 1992, when George H. W. Bush was running for re-election. In case no one's noticed, he lost. (Information Please Almanac, 2000 edition.)

Primary turnouts have as much to do with general election results as numbers of mortgages loaned have to do with numbers actually paid off on time. That is, not much.

cheers

eon
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.