Skip to main content

Democrats and the media need to settle down about the voting numbers

When covering the Republican Party this primary season, the media has typically gone in one direction - Donald Trump. When covering the Democratic Party, however, the focus has largely been on the low voter turnout, and whether or not it could be a bad sign for the party come November. Some Democrats have even echoed these sentiments. While it's hypothetically possible that the Democratic Party could have a poor showing in the general election, it's much too early to make such a prediction, or to conclude the low primary voter turnout will in any way be indicative of the turnout come November.

Here are several reasons why Democrats and the media alike should settle down on the matter:

- At the parties' peak, the GOP had 17 candidates from which to choose, while Democrats had 6

- Due to the high number of candidates, the GOP struggled to find a true frontrunner, while Hillary Clinton was always the Democratic frontrunner

- Unless it's the general election, GOPers tend to vote at higher rates than Democrats

- The Donald Trump factor: He's an incredibly divisive figure, who people tend to have a love/hate relationship with, so this has resulted in a number of proponents and opponents of Trump's candidacy and message

- This has also impacted Democrats and Democratic-leaning Independents, some of whom have crossed over in open primaries to vote for or against Trump, quite possibly in an attempt to potentially impact the general election

- According to RealClearPolitics, Democrats have a +1.0 advantage over Republicans in the 2016 generic congressional vote

- According to Gallup, Democrats hold a 3-point advantage over Republicans when it comes to registered voters, 29% to 26%, respectively

- President Obama's approval numbers are the best they've been in a while, as outside of what appears to be an aberration poll, his last six polling results have averaged out to 48.5% approval, 47.3% disapproval (net +1.2%)

- In their two most recent polls, Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump by an average of 6.5%

- No recent polls have been released of a hypothetical Clinton/Cruz general election match-up, but the most recent such poll shows Clinton trailing by 1%

So both Democrats and the media need to calm down about the voter turnout numbers to this point in primary season. We're not going to garner a very clear picture of November's election until the two parties' nominees are officially announced and polling numbers start pouring in from all parts of the country. So, as Aaron Rodgers said a couple seasons ago, everyone needs to r-e-l-a-x.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/05/donald-trump-has-not-brought-millions-and-millions-of-people-to-the-republican-party/?postshare=3381457186957787&tid=ss_tw

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"