A very unscientific test to try

[grace0418]

I posted about this earlier, but I really want people to try this and report what they come up with because I think it will be very enlightening.

Make a list of all the people you know (family, friends, co-workers, etc.) who you know are voting in November, whether it be Dem, Republican, Indy, etc. If it helps, make a grid that has the names running down the side and two columns titled 2000 and 2004. Now, either by what you know already or by asking them, fill in who they voted for (or if they didn't vote) in 2000 and who they will be voting for in 2004.

When I did this, I got MANY people who are voting for the first time in 2004. All of them are voting for Kerry. I got a few people who voted for Nader in 2000. 6 or 7 of them out of about 10 are switching to Kerry. NONE of the people who voted for Gore are switching to Bush, but SEVERAL of the people who voted for Bush are switching to Kerry. To me this grid is so much more telling than any poll I've seen because it takes into account all the people who would never be polled because they aren't "likely voters."

I don't think Bush has captured many of the first time voters. I think they're registering and voting for the first time because they want to see him out. But, like I said, this is very unscientific. Try it with your circle and see how it comes out for you. I've had friends who live and work in very conservative places and, while the numbers for Bush are higher, the trend remains the same: no new votes for Bush but many new votes for Kerry.

[BillZBubb]

1. The Repugs claim that they have registered nearly 2 million

evangelical Fundies. If that's true, Bush* will get a lot of first time voters. They are just not the type of voters that show up on the average DUers radar.

[grace0418]

2. Sadly enough I know some fundies

so they were included on my grid. But I don't think the evangelical fundy vote is any match. First of all, many already did vote last time for Bush, so I think that number was probably exaggerated (gasp! Republicans lying and exaggerating! No way!). Second of all 2 million may seem like a lot but I think Kerry has already made up 2 million between the log cabin Repubs who are switching their vote and ex-Nader voters. That still leaves other former Bushies who have seen the light and scads of other Americans who are voting for the first time. Younger kids (many who were too young to vote last time) are registering in droves, far more than in any other election. Other than the freaky fundies, these kids are largely going to vote for Kerry. Then there are the lazies. People like my husband who never bothered to vote before but are now going to be there first thing to vote for Kerry.

[Zan_of_Texas]

3. the missing 48.7%

The media and campaigns would have us believe that somewhere, in a swing state, there are a few hundred voters who need to make up their minds. And, the conventional wisdom seems to go, candidates should rush to the middle to court them. (And, of course, the media would have the candidates spend $200 million for this courtship.)

But, this pursuit of the middle is delusional. Because in the last election, apathy beat both Gore and Bush -- clobbered them!

Only 51.3% of the voting age population voted at all in 2000. The "None of the Above" vote was 48.7%.

If you look at the entire pool of the voting age population, here's how the vote went:

24.8% Gore
24.6% Bush
1.4% Nader
0.5% Other
51.3% Total who voted

+ 48.7% Total who didn't vote ("None of the above")
100.0% Total voting age US population

Roughly twice as many people "voted" for None of the Above as for either Gore or Bush. (48.7% to 24+%).

Let's say one-quarter of the 48.7% non-voters can't vote -- felon, not a citizen, whatever. That still leaves a potential voter pool of 37%, enough to defeat either candidate's 2000 total by a landslide! Why wouldn't a candidate try to appeal to them, rather than the illusory middle voter?

Sources for numbers: <> percent of entire population figures: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0763629.html
<> percent of vote that went to each candidate: http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2000-01/01cib09.htm
<> new percentages, based on total voting age population: my calculator

[crispini]

4. neat idea!

I'll go try it... would probably help me remember some people whom I need to make sure they vote! :)

[grace0418]

5. Thanks!

Report back with your results. I hope people try it. It makes me feel much better.