How many new voters would Dean bring to the general election?

There are multiple questions involved here.

We've heard a lot about Dean bringing new voters into the electoral process, so my question becomes this: If Howard Dean is the Democratic nominee, how many new voters do you estimate he will bring into the polls?

I'm not a faithful Dean watcher, so I don't know the numbers. Is his base of new voters steadily growing?

This week's Time has Bush at 51% and Dean at 46%. Would Dean's new voters be sufficient to turn the tide in Dean's favor?

I know people have disputed the 500,000+ figure on the website because if you sign up for the mailing list or whatever you're in, but there are quite a few people that attend meetups and what not. I imagine they could send us out to find a friend that doesn't vote.

doesn't represent new voters. I keep hearing about new voters being brought in by Dean. I'd just like to know the figure.

...he has so many volunteers that they could tell us all to try to find one each and that would be a sum.

Some of the precint captians in Iowa are Dean supporters who never even voted before. And at a rally there last week, 50 out of 200 weren't registered yet.

He got my name & e-mail somewhere. I'm on the list, as are other candidates' supporters. No doubt he has quite a few e-mail supporters, but not quite 500,000.

As far as bringing new voters in, he might. He might not. Dean is the #1 candidate that other Dems would specifically NOT vote for, according to this forum's poll of a couple of hours ago (Poll earlier in this forum originating a couple of hours ago.)

BusinessWeek article talking about "New Blood" in general terms:

--snip--

NEW BLOOD. Dean's message to voters: "Only you have the power..." seems to be catching on, not just with Americans in their 20s, 30s, and 40s who have felt disenfranchised from politics but also among rank-and-file Dems. His candidacy is unfolding in much the same way that Arnold Schwarzenegger lit a fire under California surfer dudes who had never before seen the inside of a polling booth. Dean's firebrand populism has these political outsiders sending money and chatting on the Web. If he can get them to vote, Dean may really be on to something.

Former New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley, himself a past Democratic Presidential candidate who recently endorsed Dean, has figured out what party insiders haven't. With turnout below 50% in Presidential elections, millions of potential voters are up for grabs. It's the Democratic Party that has the best chance to win them over. But without that infusion of new blood, the party will be trapped like a hamster on treadmill, frantically running in place to hang on to those seniors, minorities, and women who form the old party base.

Yes, Dean may be the riskiest of the Democratic hopefuls. But he also offers the party its best chance of breaking through the red state/blue state, 50/50 split in the popular vote that has thrown modern-day Presidential elections into gridlock.

More: http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan2004/nf20040112_1950_db015.htm

talking about the hip hop generation and getting them registered to vote. They showed that ones who come to the concert get in free with voter registration and ones not registered can register there and still get in free. I believe that most of these new voters will be voting for Dean. I met a woman who says she liked Clinton but was not enthused with Gore and just didn't vote but likes what she see in Dean and will vote for him. Dean gives people hope that things will change so they are willing to get their feet wet again..

"Dean gives people hope that things will change so they are willing to get their feet wet again.."

Best comment of the night! Full circle - what got this thing off the ground will take it all the way!

:toast:

Does not address the fact that Dean's progress is 90% rhetoric and not his actual record or positions on issues.

When these are made more well known, will disenfranchised voters still be drawn to the voting booth by another "Evil of two lessers" choice?

I have already spoke with many Nader voter(progressives) who did not vote before the last election. They have already adamantly declared that if it is not Kucinich they will either not bother to vote or vote Green or Natural Law, etc.

The hard to swallow facts are that Dean is not progressive, in fact many of his policies are to the right of center. Being an actual CHOICE is what draws disenfrachised voters, not more of the same.

TWL

You do the math from there.

I thinks he's brought many new people to the process, but they are probably not newly registered voters.

There's really no evidence to suggest that people under thirty are any more interested in this election than they ever have been about any other. I expect younger voters to turn out in the same numbers they always do: about 20 - 30%. Right now, about 75% of people under 30 can't even name a Democratic candidate. It's not so much that they're disaffected. It's just that they're more interested in other things.

There are a lot of misconceptions about voter turnout and I've heard Dean promoting a few of these himself recently. But the fact is, the percentage of people who vote in presidential elections really hasn't changed much since 1928, when turnout crossed the 50% line for the first time. From 1828 to 1924 the average was 32%, but since 1928 it has almost always been in the 50 - 60% range. About 60 - 70% of voting age adults register and about 80 - 90% of those show up for presidential elections.

Turnout did cross the 60% mark a couple of times in the 50s and 60s and it has dipped down to 49% once in recent history (in 1996) but the average turnout from 1928 - 2000 was 56%. Turnout for the 2000 election was 55%.

There's also no evidence to suggest that the issues and interests that matter to people who don't vote differ significantly from the ones who do. It's more like they feel they're being pretty well represented by the people who do vote and they're comfortable enough just delegating the responsibility.

Part of that is the electoral college system, I'm sure. There are very few states in contention in any given race and for most people, the outcome for their state is known well in advance. Campaigns and GOTV efforts tend to concentrate most on the swing states so turnout in those states tends to be higher on average in every race.

But barring major changes in how we vote, I don't seriously expect significantly higher turnout in this election than we saw in the last one, irrespective of who runs. Probably lower if anything, if it's Howard Dean. He may well bring out a few new faces but he also rubs a lot of people the wrong way who have been voting for years. And turnout for mid-term elections tends to be on the low side anyway.

Dean has not broken any new ground in support, financial or otherwise.

Maybe a stray Clark Supporter could drop some timely Sun Tsu passages on us right about now.

In Q3, the Dean campaign had around 168,000 individual contributors. Last quarter, the number of people who cared enough to pony up even 5 or 10 bucks was about 149,000. They took it down off their web site almost immediately.

Also ran across two articles recently talking about the number of volunteers they were planning to mobilize to go to Iowa an work the caucuses this month. One artlcle was from October and placed the target at 5000 people. The second was from December and said their goal was 3500 people.

No word yet on how many people actually showed up, but since about all the Dean campaign ever talks about is numbers, I'm sure they would be shouting it from the mountain tops if they met or exceeded the revised goal.

I can tell you this is absolutely untrue - "They took it down off their web site almost immediately."

I don't argue claims that are not backed up by relevant sources.

That there were high-jinks with The Bat. Did I miss something?

Also, 4Q is generally soft for support and contributions, yet dean set another record. I saw an analysis of this recently that I will post if I can find.

I thought you wanted back-up for the numbers I quoted. They seem to have taken the the "You did it!" bat graphic down some time on January 2nd. I went back to double-check the total number of contributors again Saturday morning (1/3) and it was gone. I thought I was going to have to wait until the FEC reports came out to get the exact number again. But it turned out I wasn't the only one who noticed.

I was talking about the general election. You know, the big one in the fall where we beat bush and take back our country (or not).

said that if Dean was nominated they would not vote for him. They would vote for any other Democrat however. Anything who thinks Dean can get a beter showing than McGovern in the GE is out of touch with reality.

If I understand the post correctly, we are not talking about swing voters, we are talking about people who don't vote?

If that is the case, what inspired a bunch of nonvoters to come out and vote for Nader the fact that there was actually another choice besides corporate Dems and corporate Repubs. Unfortunately I feel when Dean's policy positions are examined we find that he is not a significantly different choice. Dean's policies are right leaning centrist policies, much like that of Gore, if there is no inspiration then there are no new voters. Of course there will be some due to people wanting to get rid of Bush but that theory can be applied to ANY candidate, including Lieberman.

The majority of Dean supporters have never donated money to a campaign before and have never volunteered for one either. These people are NOT the "liberal base" everyone assumes that it is fueling Dean. Dean has his own energized base. That's NOT an exaggeration, it's true. The polls don't show these people because they aren't the types targetted for polling. Many of the people I have met have either never voted before, don't always vote or are so disillusioned with voting that they stopped giving a damn. There are also moderate republicans, swing voters like myself and even Greens. Dean will get some of the Green vote, some of the moderate Republican vote, many Independents and swing voters, a slew of new voters as well as much of the Democratic vote. Based on what I've seen, the only thing standing in the way of Dean kicking Bush's ass in the general election is the lack of faith some Democrats have in his ability to do what he's basically already done...have a broad enough appeal to beat Bush. The rest of us are on board. Now we're just waiting for the Democrats to notice. :shrug:

Many are new voters, too. But their number isn't the major part of Dean's support in the electorate by any stretch of imagination.

It was Dean's personal inspiration and image that drew in so many new young supporters, and it was brilliant on his part to reach out to them early on the internet the way he did. He needed volunteers, and most of the party regulars had committed early to other candidates. He brought in people with little or no experience, but tons of enthusiasm.

Most of his voter support comes from the liberal base of the party, the people who might have been expected to back Kerry or Gephardt - experienced, established Washington powers. This is why Gephardt has such low support nationally (single digit support for a warhorse like him is disappointing), and why Kerry dropped so precipitously, almost mirroring Dean's rise. Participation from the rank and file is up, but it is mostly because of the excitement of the race and the interest generated, not new voters.

if he makes several trips.....

Oh you mean through inspiration... :)

He drives a 9-passenger SUV.

I think he will take many away. He doesn't have much crossover appeal.

HTH.

There is already evidence that it will be many.

I suppose you're holding on to this evidence until it's more expedient for you to share it?

I hardly think so. If Dean is the nominee, the Democrats who don't like him will still vote for him because they hate Bush far worse. But a lot of Dean supporters are Greens, Independents and Moderate Republicans, even some Libertarians. Some of these voters don't hate Bush, but are disappointed in his financial recklessness, so they support Dean instead becaue of his record of fiscal responsibility. Many of those kinds of votes won't go to anyone but Dean. If you want to win, you go for the one who has proven they can get the most votes. That's Dean.

They will either vote third party or once again stay at home. The disenfranchised voters that came out and voted for Nader in 2000, are not enamored by Dean's centrism. They voted for Nader because he represented a "CHOICE" for the first time in a long time.

TWL