Ping ([info]zestyping) wrote,
@ 2008-01-04 13:35:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
What does Iowa turnout mean?
So by now everyone knows that Obama and Huckabee won the Iowa caucuses. But perhaps less well known is the dramatic difference in voter turnout — between Democratic and Republican, and in 2008 compared to previous years.

Iowa Caucus Turnout, 2000–2008
2000
60 760
87 666
2004
124 000
  uncontested (George W. Bush)
2008
221 000
116 114

Some of the numbers above are approximate, but the trend is clear: a huge increase in Democratic caucus participants (78% more than in 2004, and 90% more Democrats than Republicans this year). My understanding is that the Democratic caucuses also require more time and involvement than the Republican ones. All of this adds up to a lot of enthusiastic Democrats — at least in Iowa.

Here's what that looks like if you break down each bar according to the proportion of support that each candidate received.

Iowa Caucus Vote Distribution, 2000–2008
2000
BradlGore
BushForbesKeB
2004
GeDeanEdwardsKerry
  uncontested (George W. Bush)
2008
ClintonEdwardsObama
HuckabeeRomneyThoMcPa

What do you think this means for the election as a whole? Is this phenomenon local to Iowa, or is it a sign of things to come?

Sources: MSNBC, AP, CNN, Eric Appleman.


(Post a new comment)


[info]hyper_boy
2008-01-05 01:23 am UTC (link)
wow, this really is interesting. Lets hope more activism is occurring across the nation. :)

(Reply to this)

[info]flipzagging
2008-01-05 03:22 am UTC (link)
What beautiful graphs! And you did them in HTML!

One nitpick, and this is only because the graphs were so nice. The fade-out causes the eye to underestimate the total sizes of the bars, since the extremities are indistinct. Perhaps this was intentional but I don't see the reason.

Possible fixes: 1) put winners on the outside; 2) don't bother with different shades and separate blocs with white lines; 3) use alternating shades of equally strong colors (e.g. blue/darker blue/blue/darker blue).

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]zestyping
2008-01-06 12:17 am UTC (link)
You're exactly right on all counts. I separated the blocks with lighter-coloured lines. Excellent suggestion! Thanks.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]flipzagging
2008-01-06 09:35 am UTC (link)
Awesome.

To answer you original question...

I don't know a lot about the issue, but I'm going to guess.

It seems to me that caucus size might be proportional to the number of viable candidates, which is itself proportional to the perceived possibility for a change of direction in the party. Nobody really knows if the Democrats are going to go for left-wing populism or a return to DLC values. The Republicans could elect Mitt Romney or maybe even McCain. So there are more candidates, and those candidates know that they need more warm bodies to win, so they dedicate their efforts there.

It might also be proportional to the amount of money that's been raised this cycle. I assume it's going to be another record-breaker.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]eviladmin
2008-01-09 12:00 am UTC (link)
I agree with flipzaagging - all sides had a unusually number of viable candidates with some real differences and because of primary compression, there was more riding on Iowa and NH than usual.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]catachthonian
2008-01-05 04:39 am UTC (link)
I think it means that people see this election as important and that a lot of independents would rather influence the Democratic primary than the Republican primary this year...possibly because they prefer Obama to McCain or see him as more electable than McCain.

(Reply to this)
Make it python!
[info]torsvik
2008-01-06 11:35 am UTC (link)
Once again - fantastic graphs! And exactly what I need for one of my projects! Have you already made a small python script to generate it - and can you please send it to me (so that I do not have to edit the html to get perfect lengths and numbers) or do I have to do it myself?

Thanks also for the spoken Canada article! Now I know lots more about Canada!

Glad i deg!

(Reply to this)(Thread)
Re: Make it python!
[info]zestyping
2008-01-06 12:03 pm UTC (link)
Hi!

It's pretty rough code, but here it is: iowa.cgi. Have fun!

The generated HTML is extremely messy -- it contains many style attributes to force the formatting to stay correct despite all the styles applied by LiveJournal. If it's to go on a webpage of your own, it could probably be cleaned up quite a lot.

Edited at 2008-01-06 12:06 pm UTC

(Reply to this)(Parent)
Independents matter
(Anonymous)
2008-01-06 03:44 pm UTC (link)
Independent voters can pick to vote in either the Rep or Dem caucus. According to this WaPo (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/02/politics/washingtonpost/main3665764.shtml) piece Indies preferred the Dem caucus this year. Turnout really matters in low-participation elections (like primaries). Obama had it. The common wisdom is that Obama was also many minority candidate's (Dodd, Richardson) second choice while Clinton was no one's second choice.

I was at the debates in New Hampshire last night. FWIW talking to a few Dems in the halls they supported either Obama or Hillary. Unless you count that Kucinitch supporter but he might have just been some homeless guy with a Kucinitch button on (seriously, he was creepy).

Don't read too much into Iowa. It makes for a good story but the big blue states will pick the Dem candidate.

-Jack Diederich

(Reply to this)
Mo'money, mo'caucus
[info]flipzagging
2008-01-06 11:53 pm UTC (link)
[info]slit, a radical feminist Muslim from Iowa (but isn't everybody?) reports that the level of campaigning this year was unprecedented.

(Reply to this)
Sign of things to come
(Anonymous)
2008-01-07 08:53 pm UTC (link)
Just a guess, but I think a reasonable one: this has been a very fatiguing eight years for a whole lot of people both on the left and on the right. People tend to get tired of one party or another after a while, so this would be true in most cases after one party has held the reins for a long time, and in this case we have a very unpopular President, and a party that is still strongly associated with him. So I'm not surprised if there is higher or much higher turn out for candidates on the Democratic side. And I won't be surprised if it continues.

(Reply to this)(Thread)
Re: Sign of things to come
[info]mrsmith741
2008-01-15 01:58 am UTC (link)
Nice graph, I would sure like to see the number of the new hampshire primary

(Reply to this)(Parent)
Assissotom
(Anonymous)
2008-01-17 11:58 am UTC (link)
A very interesting site with top design and contents!

(Reply to this)

Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…