Reply #11: Not to be an alarmist, but .... [View All]

[patriotvoice]

The record turnouts at the primaries have to be keeping Rove awake at nights, because it’s a damned good sign for Democrats.

According to the data I've accumulated for my 2004 Election model this is not as stellar a primary year as it may seem. Here is the difference between this year's primary numbers and 1992, 1996, and 2000:

1992: -548,669
1996: 218,278
2000: 164,083

The most alarming figure, I've found, is that comparing the 1992 and 2004 primaries (which are the most similar as far as candidate field is concerned), we see a net loss of almost 550,000 primary voters. I should emphasize that until all primaries have been held and all precincts are counted, this is just a working figure.

If I were Karl Rove, I'd be more worried about attrition from Independent and unregistered voters than these primary numbers.

The full spread is available at:
http://www.ideacode.com/~bishop/home/2004/election%20forecasting.xls

We are the Slaves in the Land of the free
Who's the aggressor? Is it you or just me?
We are the victims in this war of the Greedy
Suffer in Hell. Why don't you hear me

Be my Evildoer
--Suicide Commando