That’s the early estimate of Voting Eligible Population from the Election Project.
Any analysis of the 2014 MidTerm election has to start with the fact 63.4% of voters didn’t bother to engage.
Recent Posts
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
- Day 10: The Fascist Regime Blames a Plane Crash on Nonwhite People
Thanks for posting it! Totally agree (though I notice turnout was relatively high in some of the disaster states, especially Maine and Wisconsin).
And it would be interesting to learn who turned out and why
one reason is making it easier to vote – early voting/ absentee, holiday on election day, etc, as Montana does. MT also tried to limit campaign spending
That’s been suggested for years and it hasn’t had much affect. In New Mexico we have early voting, vote by mail, etc. and it hasn’t done any good.
to what do you attribute the high (very high) MT voter turnout in this election?
First there is a bit of conundrum: Election Project has Montana at a 46.1% VEP turnout. Montana SoS has a different figure. I don’t know who is accurate or even if they both are since EP tracks Voting Eligible Population and the Montana SoS – I presume – reports registered voters so it may be a case of comparing Apples and Oranges.
To directly respond I will repeat what I said below:
I still don’t know.
That’s a bizarre discrepancy. shouldn’t we assume SOS is correct? MT has same day registration.
since you have no idea, how about voter turnout was related to (though not entirely dependent on) the candidates locally? MT had a populist, very much one of their own in Amanda Curtis, who motivated the voters (on the dem side) – both the candidate and the issues voters felt strongly about, vs. the Koch $ machine that turned out it’s voters (contrast Grimes’ campaign with Curtis)
From US Elections Project:
Montana 2013 population (est): 1,015,165
% under 18: 22.1%
Voting Eligible Population: 791,828
Total Vote: 365,000
VEP turnout: 46.1%
Registered Voters (from SoS): 674,264
Total Votes (ditto): 373,818¹
Registered Voter Turnout: 55.44%
From the SoS office:
I would assigned the higher than US average Montana turnout to a combination of this political enviornment plus a low number of actual votes – meaning an individual’s vote matters – plus the fact candidates know there will be a higher turnout and thus have to discuss issues and policies to appeal to voters.
IOW & IMO …
is a result², not a cause.
—————————————————————————————-
and voter suppression issues also played a role (GA, KS, NC)
Another starting point, half the population has an IQ of 100 or less.
Most of those that showed mostly blindly and consistently vote for whatever DEM or GOP is running. A smaller portion voted for the personality or message they could hear and preferred even if their understanding of it was limited or faulty. The non-voters had a variety of reasons for not participating. For some, what was on offer didn’t impact their lives. For others, all of the candidates were too loathsome to vote for or not different enough. From a strictly personal perspective, there is rarely any reason for the unmarried and childless and working/low-mid class to vote. We make just enough money to pay taxes to support all the goods and services that we’ll never directly benefit from and have no voice in political decisions. When we get old, we’re too ga-ga or poor to see much difference between the two parties and both have promised not to cut our Social Security benefits but only that for future retirees.
For the Tea Party make that 70 or less. 60 if they can’t get their knuckles off the floor. I really do wish more of them would try to make love to their guns.
No, 70 or less is much too cognitively slow. Even below the lower half of average (85-100), not so many express enough confidence in their cognitive abilities to engage in political activity. They’re just not too bright and live in a not to bright bubble.
It was snark. I did not mean to dis the mentally challenged. A friend has a Down’s Syndrome son. He’s a nice boy. I say boy because although chronologically a man he’s really a young kid. I’m always pleased that he remembers me the once a year that I see him. He’s so excited and shakes my hand vigorously.
because your vote will almost never be the difference.
It reminds me of the exchange from Catch-22 (I Paraphrase)
To Yossarian: You should vote. What if everyone behaved like you did?
Yossarian: Then I would be a damn fool to think any different.
The pattern of low turnout in midterms is as old as the republic. Per did a study and I think found the gap was a consistent 20 – 25% lower in mid-terms – and it was consistent going back to 1800.
Telling us political disengagement in mid-terms is basic to the American political system.
BTW, Cognitive Psychology and neuroscience tells us all decision making is, ultimately, irrational. Glossing this finding is people trained in Critical Thinking Skills and having better, i.e., accurate, Information make better decisions.
Which means that when the GOP pols and their corporate cronies start crowing about a mandate, each and every one of us should take a line from Gil Scott-Heron’s song “B-Movie”: “Well the first thing I’m gonna say is mandate, my ass!” It also means that the enthusiasm gap is going to continue to kill Dems unless or until they find a way to reach those voters.
Turnout in my county was 43.5% – 62% GOP, 36% Dem. The rest was Libertarian. Sad.
must look state by state, however
Alaska, Wisconsin, Maine, Iowa, Colorado, and Minnesota were the only states to have turnout above 50%. Kentucky had 44.2%. Florida was 43.1% The big ballyhooed voter motivation drive in North Carolina raised the rate to 40.7% from 39.8% in 2010, compare to 65.4% in 2012.
Five states had turn out below 30%.
My own state of New Mexico managed to drift above average with 38.3%. (whoopie)
I have my guesses as to why voter participation dropped ~5% from 2010 but I don’t know why and neither does anyone else as of 11/6/14. To find out would require a well funded research project, the GOP don’t care – they won, after all – and there’s no evidence the Dems want to know.
The sad thing is that the elections that occur during the so-called “off” years, and especially those elections that are local have so much of an impact on day to day life. Problem is that a lot of folks don’t really know what’s at stake, except for those directly involved in those respective campaigns. I speak from experience running for school board a couple times a few years back. There’s no real news coverage, no publicly available info in many cases as to the races and issues (and the positions of the respective candidates), so folks forget about them. I think for those elections I was involved in, if the turnout was even 20% of registered voters, it would have been a shock.
And your point? WI re-elected Walker, Maine re-elected its crazy GOP gov, Iowa replaced Sen Harkin with a pig castrator, and Colorado elected a Sen opposed to the minimum wage and pro-fetal personhood.
Was no point. It was a statement of data.
also Moontana, see my comment below
MT voter turnout [one of?] the highest
http://electionresults.sos.mt.gov/resultsVoterTurnout.aspx
54.62%,
some counties as high as 74, 75%
MT has election day holiday [for schools at least], voter registration up to and including election day, easy absentee voting – i.e. MT wants everyone to vote. MT also tried to limit Citizens United