• TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    The real story:

    Democratic primary 2020, total votes: 14,263.

    Democratic primary 2024 total votes (before run-off): 12,761.

    ~10% drop in Democratic primary voters (reliable D’s).

    Lauren Ashley Simmons will win this district, but the things that is telling is the drop in voter engagement. These are the only data points we’ll be getting on this going into the election.

    But a 10% drop in reliable D’s electoral engagement should be more than concering to Democrats.

    • reddig33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      6 months ago

      Primary runoff elections were held on some random Tuesday, just after a recent election on property taxes and other local issues. If you want voter turnout, elections need to be held on consistent days every year, and not some weird date pulled out of a hat when voters already just went to the polls.

      Better yet, give us ranked choice primaries so there aren’t any runoffs.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        I mean, those are fine editorials, but the data is what the data is.

        This isn’t the only data point. Democratic voter engagement is depressed when compared with 2020.

        We’re only going to get a few more of these before the big game, and we should weight them more heavily than typical polling.

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            I mean that’s what the polling data is showing us.

            Its a bit dated, but this specific type of poll is less common:

            But some have spotlighted a potential saving grace for Democrats. In addition to showing Trump ahead by an average of four percentage points, the poll asked voters about a race without Biden. An unnamed “Democratic candidate” shifts the race by 12 points on the margins, turning a four-point Democratic deficit against Trump into an eight-point lead, 48 percent to 40 percent.

            Whats really, really, REALLY interesting to me about this is that it ends up with the same 12 point spread that actually appeared previously in the differential polling error associated with the 2020 election. In that election, Biden was +12 going into the election (composite of polls October/ November), and basically tied.

            Biden ended up under-performing his polling by an average of 4 points, and Trump over-performed his polling by an average of 8 points.

            So if you swap out Biden for “Generic Democrat”, you cover, almost precisely, how much so we expect Biden to under-perform his polling come November.

            I mean, Biden should have been grooming Buttigieg, grooming Kamela. We’ve got Elizebeth Warren, we’ve got Gretchen Whitmer, we’ve got Nina Turner. Ron Wyden, Jay Inslee, even Gavin Newsom (although he is not super popular).

            I mean shit you really want to fuck with the opposition? Fucking run Laura Kelly, Democratic governor of Kansas. She can run on abortion as a right, based on her recent striking down of the anti-abortion legislation there.

            Like the bench is deep for popular Democrats if you put even a bit of effort into collating a list.

            • hark@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Unfortunately the party isn’t interested in winning, it desperately wants to keep the status quo as much as possible, which is why we got biden in the first place.

              • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                By which I mean that I totally agree, but am also exasperated.

                The only way I think we can change things is to get the dummy-thicc blue-no-matter-who crowd to realize and give up on Biden as a candidate. We can’t even really start the conversation with him still in the room. Move the electorate and, more importantly, the media landscape; have them come to terms with this, we can take it to the convention and see what happens.

                I called this super far out, like, 8 months ago? 10 months ago? If Lemmy had a decent way to search my comments I could find it.

            • Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Meh, I’m fine with none of those people. They are all the same, working for the same overlords, only difference is Biden has a stutter. Not a single thing would be different under any of the establishment democrats it is all a coordinated hivemind. I am so sick of the same shit. The people move to the left, and the government keeps shuffling to the right. Give us someone actually progressive. It’s starting to feel like this two party system doesn’t actually represent its tax paying population, and only represents a rich few who don’t actually pay any of those taxes. It feels like the two party system is being manipulated to intentionally move things to the right to benefit the upper class. I’m starting to feel like there is some taxation without any representation and a little disenfranchised. I’m starting to feel like I REALLY don’t give a shit who gets elected because the future is shit for me and my children with either choice. Maybe those people on January 6th at least fucking DID SOMETHING. Even if I don’t agree with it. But voting doesn’t do SHIT. They make sure of it. I will vote, AgAiNsT TrUmP (yay), But the Dems can’t sit here and play with fire and be surprised when it burns them just like it did in 2016. Put in some effort to actually represent the population and people might come vote. Until then, the dems deserve what is coming to them. Problem is we are the ones that suffer. The class of people at the top, the people you just listed as candidates, are all perfectly happy with a Trump presidency. They get their tax breaks, and they get to laugh at how dumb he is on MSNBC and all the other 24 hour news diarrhea channels while he lowers the bar for future candidates. It is a best case scenario for them.

              • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                Nina Turner, Inslee, Witmer, Wyden, all super progressive. But I don’t care any more.

                Like, at this point, fucking run anyone that can win. I’m just trying to put 4 more years on the count-down-to-all hell breaks loose clock. And issue I have currently is that Biden doesn’t get us there while his apologists around here claim we have no other options.

                When I’m thinking about this, I’m thinking who do I want to play the game against? Who do I want sitting on the other side of the table from me in this fight? I don’t want to fight an emboldened, empowered, free from the rule of law fascist uprising. I’m too tired for that. My hips aren’t as good as they were when I was 24. I need a soft bed at night.

                • Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  You’re right, those candidates are better. My brain focused on Buttigieg and Kamala in your comment and I went on a rant. Honestly starting to realize the smaller state and local elections make actual differences, everything at the federal level is a money funneling clown show.

    • Hegar@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      6 months ago

      I agree that dems have cause for concern broadly, but I’m not sure that a 10% drop during an uncontested incumbent primary translates to a “10% drop in reliable D’s electoral engagement”.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Lauren Ashley Simmons will win this district, but the things that is telling is the drop in voter engagement.

      Negative campaigns often depress voter turnout. In this case, you’ve got a candidate espousing some really vile beliefs. Folks who aren’t enthusiastic about the incumbent and don’t know much about the challenger stay home as a result.

      But a 10% drop in reliable D’s electoral engagement should be more than concering to Democrats.

      In Texas its something of a push. But Texas Democrats love putting up shitty milquetoast moderate candidates and then getting rolled in the general election.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Its the same district, same primary, slightly different slate of candidates.

        Its about as close to a controlled experiment as you’ll ever get in politics.

        But Texas Democrats love putting up shitty milquetoast moderate candidates and then getting rolled in the general election.

        Aint that the theme. The number of shitty rightwing Democrats being handed safe blue districts is ridiculous. Its a good thing that in this district in particular, its a pretty left-wing candidate.