Political Forum
     

Go Back   Political Forum > Other Political Discussion > Political Blogs


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 08:10 AM
SeminalBlog SeminalBlog is offline
Analyst
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,855
SeminalBlog is on a distinguished road
Default What is the relationship between primary turnout and general election outcomes?

(originally posted at nirmalm.com)Â(*)
We've often heard the argument that because Democratic primary participation is disproportionately higher in a particular state, Democrats stand a chance of performing better in that state in the general election. After Alex Thurston made this argument about the upcoming Oklahoma Senate race, I decided to find out if this claim is actually true.
To validate this argument, we want to compare the percentage Democratic primary turnout (out of the total primary turnout) to the performance of the Democratic presidential candidate in the general election for each state. To account for crossover voters, it makes sense to only consider state primaries that were competitive on both sides. For simplicity's sake I decided to look at the 2000 election, but the 1988 election would work as well. Data and full details on how I selected the states here.

Here are the states with competitive primaries:
Clearly, in 2000 there was a correlation between partisan turnout in competitive primaries and the general election outcome in those states. A linear regression with 2000 Gore performance as the dependent variable has an R-Squared value of .829 and a p-value less than 0.001, which indicates that there is a strong linear relationship.Given that, this year's primary turnout in states that were competitive on both sides may be a useful input when determining which states are going to be "swing states" in the general election.
Another argument, that Democrats will do better in the upcoming general election because Democratic primary turnout is higher nationally this year than in previous years, is harder to validate. As Matt Stoller pointed out, this is because there have been too few competitive primaries on both sides since the McGovern reforms to begin making that judgment. Once we know the 2008 general election results, we can start to think about this by examining the turnout in competitive primaries in 1988, 2000, and 2008.
Nirmal is an activist from Michigan who has worked with a variety of progressive organizations and campaigns. His writing can be found at nirmalm.com
</img> </img> </img>


(Source Link)
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Red Cross - Donate Today    Save the Rainforest
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Public Financing in the General Election. DuH2 Elections & Campaigns 34 03-04-2008 10:53 PM
McCain's General Election Message [ElephantBiz] KnowBlog Political Blogs 0 02-26-2008 07:10 AM
Another Reason To End The Primary Election System Johannes Elections & Campaigns 0 10-02-2007 02:38 AM
Irish General Election EiregoSod Western Europe 25 05-25-2007 02:27 PM
DeLay to spend primary election night with lobbyists f100supersabr Current Events 15 03-08-2006 08:29 PM

Sponsored Links

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0
Template-Modifikationen durch TMS
vBCredits v1.3 ©2007 by Darkwaltz4
Advertisement System V2.1 By   Branden