Low turnout seen for [CA] March 2 voting

[question everything]

From http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040228/news_1n28region.html

SACRAMENTO – Secretary of State Kevin Shelley said yesterday turnout for the March 2 election likely would draw 43 percent of California voters – among the lowest for a presidential primary since 1984.

In the last 20 years, only the March 1996 election brought out a lower turnout at 42 percent. The highest in recent years was in March 2000.

In that election, Vice President Al Gore faced off against former New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley for the Democratic nomination; Republicans chose between then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain.

One of the highest turnouts ever was last October's gubernatorial recall election that drew 68 percent.

[twilight]

1. I do not believe that ...

Not for one minute. People have been registering to vote all over the place around here - record #'s in the last election voted. They ain't seen nothing yet, because people are PISSED!

:dem:

[still_one]

2. I can hardly believe that!

Everyone I spoke with at work is going to vote this year.

If Bush wins in November because the Democrats do not turn out to vote then this country deserves everything that will be reaped upon it by the neo-cons!

[twilight]

4. you are right!

and also - if the gov't spreads this type of news, perhaps some people will say to themselves, "Oh, no one is going to vote anyway ... why should I bother to waste MY time?"

This statement discourages people from voting, feeling like they've already lost out before the first vote hath been cast! :grr: :grr:



:dem: :kick: :kick:

[question everything]

5. Then it is important for poll watchers to dial and dial and dial

It is important for the local Democratic parties to recruit precinct poll watchers. What they do is throughout the day they check the precinct list and those who have not voted yet get a phone call reminding them, urging them to go and vote.

But, then, you know. This is only the primary. Let's hope that the California Democrats will have such a system in place come November.

[mitchtv]

3. time for a western Regional Primary

It is disheartening to see redstates decide our candidates . Why F'n bother SC, TN, VA, NH have decided for us.

[Journeyman]

6. Most perplexing. . . especially with the initiatives on the ballot. . .

I'd think both parties would be out in force next week, even the Republicans, if for no other reason than to vote on the proposed bond issues Der Gropenator is trying to foist off on us. If turnout is low, I've no idea how this might reflect on the initiatives, especially as the Republicans are the ones pushing hardest for their passage (quite the Bizzaro World we've created on the Left Coast this season).

One number to keep an eye on in this is not the overall turnout, but the numbers who come to vote Democratic.

[Timefortruth]

7. It's strange that they don't explain why

they think turnout will be so low. Because people don't care who wins the primary?

[maggrwaggr]

10. uh, I think it's because it's a foregone conclusion that it's Kerry Kerry

Kerry Kerry Kerry.

:eyes:

Me, I'm voting for Dean. Gonna try to get him some more delegates.

[Cronus Protagonist]

12. I know two people who never vote who are voting this primary.

I have two of my friends, who do not normally vote in any elections, voting this primary. I think the article is bunk.

"FUCK BUSH" Buttons, Stickers & Magnets

[rfkrocks]

8. what party is this secretary?

[Sperk]

9. more bullsh*t, continuing cover story for Diebold .

Can't you see the tale being woven?

I'll say it again....if * gets away with stealing california and so the election.....he will regret it.

[maggrwaggr]

11. we're talking about the primary, not the general

I expect huge numbers for the general.

Why should people vote in the primary when Kerry's gonna win it anyway? That's how a lot of people are gonna think.

The initiatives have gotten almost no press.

[shanti]

13. and the initiatives are the most important reason to vote

this time! vote YES on 56. the legislators must be FORCED to get a budget in place by july 1 and not balance it on the backs of the state workers, nonprofits, and others that desperately need their payments on time and in full.

btw, i'm also giving dean my vote this time. my conscience insists;-)

[Big_Mike]

14. I'm a bad yardstick

because I always vote. But this time, I'm pushing all the neighbors to vote. We have a school district that has to do serious capital improvements, and I'm pushing the neighbors for both 55 and the local bond. I tell them that if for no other reason, vote no to everything, but at least vote. If not, you got no grounds to bitch.

I just wish there was a way to vote negatively for a candidate, where he had to get more positive votes than all other candidates to win his office. Croynism is a strong force in my county, and I'd like to get rid of a few hacks on the Boards around the area.