The Republican Wave in Wisconsin

Intrepid reader Donald has a reply to my last post that led me to look at the numbers from the Wisconsin primaries. Here is slice of his comment.

I'm not sure how strongly that rightward gale is blowing. There's no evidence of that here in Wisconsin. Turnout was dismal.

Turnout was somewhat lower than expected, and I don't know what that means. Republican turnout dwarfed Democratic turnout, and I have an idea what that means.

Wisconsin is an open primary state, so we can compare the distribution of turnout between the two parties and use it as a gage of enthusiasm. Unfortunately for this purpose, Russ Feingold was unopposed. Here is the relative turnout for the gubernatorial primaries:

Republican Primary Vote:    614,611

Democratic Primary Vote    233,240

Of course Donald will object that the GOP primary was competitive whereas the Democratic Primary was not. Fair enough. But a disproportion of more than 2.5 to 1 is hard to explain that way.

Then we can look at the race for Lt. Governor. Here the races were about equally competitive, with the GOP winner and the Democratic winner getting 47% and 52% respectively. Equally competitive races here ought to have evened out turnout somewhat, if that was what was motivating voters to choose the GOP primaries. Obviously it did not. Here are the numbers for the Lt. Governor race.

Republican Primary Vote:    549,244

Democratic Primary Vote    207,160

That two and a half to one disproportion in favor of voters choosing GOP primaries isn't unique to Wisconsin. We have seen it in primary after primary all year long.

Where actual elections have been held, we have seen it sweep Republican candidates to victory. This has happened even in places like Massachusetts and New Jersey. Where exit polls have been taken, the disproportion indicated two things: a big advantage in Republican turnout and a strong shift of independent voters toward the GOP.

It looks to me like the wave to the right that I described in my previous post did not somewhere part around Wisconsin. If this is correct, and if it keeps up through November 2^nd, a statistical tie with Ron Johnson isn't going to save Russ Feingold.

Comments

[George Mason]

Considering the size of the state, this looks like a pretty good turnout for a Primary election.

[Donald Pay]

First, Wisconsin always has high voter turnout compared to other states, so while the numbers look good compared to other states, they aren't impressive for here. It would have been a good turnout for a municipal election, but this wasn't a municipal election. The Presidential Primary election two years ago drew about three times the turnout.

Second, the open primary means you can't really tell what the numbers mean regarding party preference. There's a lot of game playing. It was thought the Republican Governor's race was going to be closer, and many Democrats (including me) who will vote for Democrat Barrett in the general election voted in the Republican Primary for Neumann. Just looking at the voting in the "isthmus precincts" in Madison (90% Democrat), you can tell voting was down for Democrats and the Republican count was up by about double its normal amount. What that tells me is that there was crossover by people who will never vote for Republicans in the fall.

Third, major Democratic constituencies in Milwaukee don't vote in large numbers in primaries. It's just a fact that the minority populations and the working class don't come out for primary voting unless there are large numbers of open seats in precincts where the Democratic primary essentially is the general election. That didn't happen this year.

Fourth, I'm not sure you understand that in Wisconsin you can't cross party lines once you select the party primary you're going to vote in. So, the LG race or any other race for that matter doesn't reflect any more than which party's primary you decided to vote, whether it was a legitimate party preference or a desire to play games.

[George Mason]

Donald; I cast my first vote in Wisconsin in 1972. I am well acquainted with its peculiarities. I was only commenting on the total number of people who cast ballots.
South Dakota has traditionally higher turnouts for general elections than Wisconsin and still does not (like Wisconsin) see comparable turnouts for primaries. So I do not see the numbers as insignificant.

[KB]

Keep rationalizing, Donald. A much larger turnout for Republicans is a much larger turnout. Whether it is due to higher Republican enthusiasm or a shift in independents or, as I am inclined to believe, both, it still reflects the national trend. As to whether the crossovers will vote Republican this fall, well, the state isn't Massachusetts.

[Donald Pay]

Republicans: two upper level races, one very competitive with multi-millions spent, another not so competitive but multi-millionaire spent millions.

Democrats: no race for Senate, token competition for Governor and very little spent.

Now I ask my Republican friends who so strongly believe in the right of corporations and rich people to dump tons of money into campaigns, what is this money supposed to buy if not the votes to elect them to high office? Is the purpose of spending all that money just to enrich the TV and radio corporations, or might it be to drive turnout? When Herb Kohl (D-Kohl's and the Milwaukee Bucks) does it, it's to buy votes. Isn't it the same when Ron Johnson, Scott Walker and Mark Neumann do it?

[Donald Pay]

KB, This might give you a bit of a taste for what's starting to happen to RoJo in Wisconsin.

http://216.75.16.212/video/2010/09/13/wi-sen_feingold_ad_ron_johnson_in_his_own_words.html

[duggersd]

Hmmm, a commercial that is rather ambiguous at best using "in his own words". It will be interesting to see what happens here. I am sure Feingold is going to crush him. All of the polls show it, right? And there is this commercial that absolutely crushes Johnson. You played a little game by voting for whoever that guy was. What did he get? 10% of the vote? We will see when Ron Johnson turns his ads against RF. RF would lose my vote just for McCain/Feingold. We shall see.

[Donald Pay]

I hate to tell you this, duggersd, (well, no I don't), but RoJo has been spending his millions on TV and radio ads attacking Feingold for the last two months. The guy is a gaffe machine and a fabricator, so he's had to limit his public appearance to controlled situations, refuse to debate his Republican opponents, and let his political consultants put words in his mouth.

Voting in the open primary is done all the time here by both sides. Republicans do it much more often in Madison, because the Republican Party rarely has any primary races here.

[William]

Gaffe machines and fabricators may turn the tide this year.

Certainly, voters are showing not only their dissatisfaction with Democratic Party candidates this year, they're showing they're dissatisfaction with the "status quo".

While it may play out well for Republicans this year, it doesn't necessarily mean all Republicans will do well. The "masses" are disgusted with both major parties
this year. Will the Republicans and true conservatives embrace their roots and use them to grow, or will the national party as a whole become irrelevant?

[George Mason]

Our friend Donald continues the the liberal line that allowing organizations or people with large bank accounts to contribute to political campaigns is a bad thing, unless of course the their names are Soros or Kennedy or Mott or AFL-CIO or AFSCME, etc. As the Supreme Court has affirmed the First Amendment asserts the right of everyone to participate in the political debate. And as has been demonstrated in every election, it's not about the money, it's about the message. As we have already seen in this primary season there have been candidates who have significantly outspent their opponents and lost.

[duggersd]

Donald, I see your point. Ron Johnson cannot win. This proves it. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/wisconsin/election_2010_wisconsin_senate
I guess there are six more years of Feingold. Ron Johnson should just concede now.

[Donald Pay]

Rasmussen's telephonic surveys are unreliable as a guide to tracking campaigns. This sort of polling undercounts low-income, high-tech and student voters, the demographic most likely to vote for liberals. As indicated earlier, candidates have their own polling which they use to hone their campaign messages to segments of the population that they think may be swayed. I'm more interested in what those are telling the candidates. One indication is the sort of ads run. Johnson just made a huge media buy with an ad spinning his "Social Security is a Ponzi scheme" gaffe. RoJo is clearly concerned his gaffe is costing him support with older voters.

[duggersd]

Actually Donald, he is right that Social Security is a ponzi scheme. That is NOT a gaffe. The fact of the matter is that if something is not done about SS, it will not be there for future generations. Perhaps you are old enough that you will at least get some of it so you do not care about those coming behind you?
As for the younger people, etc. recent polling suggests that younger people are turning more and more conservative. This includes things like Social Security and abortion.
As for Rasmussen, is anybody else polling? Rasmussen has historically been within a couple of percentage points. Usually he nails the Republican pretty close and underscores the Democrat by a couple. This is probably due to the "undecideds". I think you are perhaps letting your hate for Johnson get in the way of your objectivity. A month and a half is a lifetime in politics and knocking off Feingold is still a daunting task, but someone with the money to get his message out can do it. BTW, did you and the other three people who voted for that other guy in the primary have a party? You are sounding more and more like you are grasping straws. Good luck with that.

[George Mason]

Donald old friend a couple questions. Did you check any other polls (Gallup, Quinnipiac, mason-Dixon, etc.)?
Don't you suppose the reason that Rasmussen is so ubiquitous in the media is because he is more accurate?

[Donald Pay]

From the Social Security Administration:

"There is a superficial analogy between pyramid or Ponzi schemes and pay-as-you-go insurance programs in that in both money from later participants goes to pay the benefits of earlier participants. But that is where the similarity ends. A pay-as-you-go system can be visualized as a simple pipeline, with money from current contributors coming in the front end and money to current beneficiaries paid out the back end. As long as the amount of money coming in the front end of the pipe maintains a rough balance with the money paid out, the system can continue forever. There is no unsustainable progression driving the mechanism of a pay-as-you-go pension system, and so it is not a pyramid or Ponzi scheme.
If the demographics of the population were stable, then a pay-as-you-go system would not have demographically-driven financing ups and downs, and no thoughtful person would be tempted to compare it to a Ponzi arrangement. However, since population demographics tend to rise and fall, the balance in pay-as-you-go systems tends to rise and fall as well. This vulnerability to demographic ups and downs is one of the problems with pay-as-you-go financing. But this problem has nothing to do with Ponzi schemes or any other fraudulent form of financing; it is simply the nature of pay-as-you-go systems."

[KB]

To Dugger: your introduction of the Rasmussen poll was well played!

To Donald: The question whether Social Security is in some sense a Ponzi scheme comes down to two other questions. First, did the Social Security system, during some period of time, rely for its financial solvency on unsustainable population growth? Second, did the popularity of the system, for some considerable period, rest on that unsustainable growth?

I think the answer to both questions is clearly yes. That means that, at some point, the system clearly became a Ponzi scheme.

[George Mason]

KB; In Re Social Security, go back a couple years and remember that all the liberals were blathering on about the "Social Security Lockbox" (including Tim Johnson). Now it is a pay as you go system(which is the method by which it has been operated). If it is a pay as you go it is ipso facto a Ponzi scheme.

[KB]

Good point, George. The "lockbox" language was a con if ever there was one.

[duggersd]

I just read there is a PPP poll coming out tomorrow that will show Feingold down by double digits. Ron Johnson may as well give up now. First Rasmussen, then PPP. Can it get any worse?

[KB]

Don't worry, Dugger. If Feingold loses, Donald will explain to us why it didn't really happen.

[duggersd]

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/9/21/903715/-WI-Sen-WI-Gov:-Dems-hurting-with-six-weeks-to-go