G.O.P. Drops in Voting Rolls in Many States

Source: NY Times

Well before Senators Barack Obama and John McCain rose to the top of their parties, a partisan shift was under way at the local and state level. For more than three years starting in 2005, there has been a reduction in the number of voters who register with the Republican Party and a rise among voters who affiliate with Democrats and, almost as often, with no party at all.

While the implications of the changing landscape for Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain are far from clear, voting experts say the registration numbers may signal the beginning of a move away from Republicans that could affect local, state and national politics over several election cycles. Already, there has been a sharp reversal for Republicans in many statehouses and governors’ mansions.

In several states, including the traditional battlegrounds of Nevada and Iowa, Democrats have surprised their own party officials with significant gains in registration. In both of those states, there are now more registered Democrats than Republicans, a flip from 2004. No states have switched to the Republicans over the same period, according to data from 26 of the 29 states in which voters register by party. (Three of the states did not have complete data.)

In six states, including Iowa, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania, the Democratic piece of the registration pie grew more than three percentage points, while the Republican share declined. In only three states — Kentucky, Louisiana and Oklahoma — did Republican registration rise while Democratic registration fell, but the Republican increase was less than a percentage point in Kentucky and Oklahoma. Louisiana was the only state to register a gain of more than one percentage point for Republicans as Democratic numbers declined.



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/us/politics/05flip.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

:dem:

their leader to commit treason - witness bush's release of the Plame identity

and I suspect its just the usual ebb that occurs every so many years, the democrats had that these past few years since the 80s now its the republicans turn hopefully.

percentage to allocate to Dems, Repubs, and Indies. Have the pollsters factored in the increased number of Dems in their percentage allocated to each group?

If they haven't, then Obama isn't benefitting from that change in their poll results.

By oversampling a dwindling number of Republicans, the polls are skewed in McThuselah's favor, which feeds the media's favored narrative of a horse race, so it gets reported without any skepticism whatsoever.

Work hard, volunteers. This year your efforts will pay off better than they ever have before.

IF the methodology used by Gallup and the like are based on previous election cycles, then this indicates a WHOLE NEW BALL GAME ....

Throw out the old expectations, Gallup .... If they don't register GOP voters, then they won't fulfill your intended desire to have them vote in great numbers ....

Finally: I can rest a little easier about the hoped-for outcome .... I hadn't been buying the hype about the Democrats rolling over the GOP, (they certainly haven't been 'earning' votes), but this information indicates the GOP wont have voters at the polls in the numbers they will need: Democrats win by default ...

It's been hard slogging. We're all going to have to continue to do all we can, too.

It has taken most of my adult life to get us to this point: Republican policies have been a failure all along, but it's been a long time coming for folks to realize that.

Yes .... living in a republican nightmare is 'hard slogging' ... but IF we win (and I frankly have many doubts), it wont be because the Democrats have provided a persuasive argument that explains why their philosophy is superior ....

Apparently: We may win because we 'aren't republicans' ..... The 'hard slogging' was living with Bush and the GOP ..... I would prefer the Democrats formed an unassailable message of hope and success for ALL Americans ...

I look for a strong voice who annunciates LOUD and CLEAR why being a Democrat is the best choice ... Yet I just hear weak assed platitudes that border on apology ....

I am a Democrat because of orators like JFK who created an integrated vision of life in a society that provides avenues of success for EVERYONE .... Obama is as close as they come to being 'visionary' with the power of oratory ... but even he is presenting an uneven philosophical thrust in this election ....

Suffering under the right is hard slogging, indeed ... but it provides no other reason to vote for the Democrats other than they 'arent republicans' ....

That is a default win ....

For what it's worth, they passed on their New Deal values to me.

What's been hard slogging has been the work grassroots activists have done in bringing all these new registrations about. It didn't just happen by itself, or simply because of Republican misrule (though there's certainly been that): it has happened because lots of folks gave of their time and money to build the party. We've had to overcome not only the arguments of the Republicans in the public sphere, aided by the media, but also the sense on the part of many that they are politically powerless. The argument that we have made is that people of conscience must act to arrest the decline of our government. While the Republicans have millions at their disposal from deep-pocketed special interests, we've had to rely on money in small contributions, money donated by folks who, in this economy, find it hard to find any extra.

There is a model of presidential elections that suggests that we are going to win by default: the time-for-change model. That model, however, doesn't say anything about political ideas and ideologies, which are the domain of political philosophers rather than forecasters. There's a bit of a disconnect between academic political theory and the manifestations of ideology we see in such things as speeches and party platforms. We know empirically that there are many reasons for the party identification of any given voter, and that there are many different ways of being a Democrat. If, however, your core political value is equality of opportunity, then I do think the party is doing a pretty good job of advocating for it politically.

It seems to me you're lamenting the Manichean dualism inherent in the two-party system: I happen to agree with you on that score. It would be swell if elections were always won by the party that puts forward the most coherent political philosophy, the one that embodies all the aspirations of our better natures. In the end, however, our politicians are are politicians, and that's a good thing. I'm a political theorist, and as such, I've spent quite a bit of time with some of the folks who are doing the best work in this area. The best ideas? Sure. Inspiring? Perhaps, if you read their books, but most folks don't read, and if they did, it wouldn't be the latest by Bruce Ackerman. The best we can do on that score is to wage a war on two fronts: TV ad buys for the masses, articles by public intellectuals for those folks who still care to read.

And that is all that really counts.

to vote for the gop.

is a clear indicator of a party which is not going away quietly. The wailing and shrieking and gnashing of teeth are nothing more than the death rattle of a party and movement.

Maybe to the fucking propagandistic assholes who call themselves "journalists" these days...

Washington State's new primary system is a "top two": All candidates for an office run as a pool in the primary; the two that receive the most votes will go head-to-head in the general election. Party affiliation is irrelevant; if the voters select two Republicans or two Democrats, so be it.

Under the law, candidates can list a "party preference." A surprising number of candidates, including the Republican favorite for governor, have listed their party preference as "G.O.P. Party" rather than "Republican Party." So far, none of the candidates have offered an explanation as to why they would abandon the moniker of Republican, but I think a quick glance at the other Washington gives ample explanation.

:rofl:


History: From 1935 to 2003, Washington had a blanket primary, when it was overturned by the US Supreme Court as unconstitutional. In 2004, voters overwhelmingly approved Initiative 872, which created a Top Two primary system. Court challenges kept it from being implemented until early this year, when the US Supreme Court allowed to stand a lower court's ruling that our Top Two did meet constitutional requirements and so was legal.