Althouse: Myth busted: It all depends on turnout.

November 5, 2014

Myth busted: It all depends on turnout.

"Highest turnout for mid-term in Wisconsin in at least 64 years."

14 comments:

Lance said...: Wisconsin: 56.9%
Colorado: 52.4%
Iowa: 50.6%
New Hampshire: 48.8%
Maryland: 45.5%

Looks like Republicans have a ground game of their own. I wonder what Secretary Clinton thinks about that.; 11/5/14, 10:08 AM
Jaq said...: As more results come in, Democrat losses grow - The New York Times.; 11/5/14, 10:10 AM
alan markus said...: Obviously the right ones weren't turned out. We didn't hear about any barbecue for votes picnics in Milwaukee this time, where participants were taken to City Hall to early vote. In 2012 complaints were filed about it, but not acted on by the GAB (or DA?).

It's almost as if there was teh perception that any such campaign activities might be held to a high level of scrutiny with some strict literal interpretations of the applicable laws. Any careless undotted i's or uncrossed t's would subject oneself to the full force of the GAB or District Attorney.; 11/5/14, 10:14 AM
Jaq said...: Come gather round people wherever you roam
and admit that the waters around you have grown
and accept it that soon you'll be drenched to the bone
for the order is rapidly chaning; 11/5/14, 10:42 AM
Anonymous said...: For the past few weeks we were all warned about the massive amounts of fraud that occurs without Voter ID, resulting in a stolen election.

Those predictions seem to be correct.; 11/5/14, 10:43 AM
Todd said...: madisonfella said...
For the past few weeks we were all warned about the massive amounts of fraud that occurs without Voter ID, resulting in a stolen election.

Those predictions seem to be correct.
11/5/14, 10:43 AM

Does this mean that you are now on board with voter ID laws and other common sense structural changes to the voting process to make it more "honest"?; 11/5/14, 10:59 AM
traditionalguy said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 11/5/14, 11:04 AM
traditionalguy said...: Yeah. That's what they said about the Benghasi video protest riots.

Turnout is important, but bringing your weapons squad with 80mm mortars with you is the key to killing a US Ambassador.; 11/5/14, 11:04 AM
Michael The Magnificent said...: Does this mean that you are now on board with voter ID laws and other common sense structural changes to the voting process to make it more "honest"?

Ha! Hahahaha! Haaaaaaah! OMG! Bwaaaaahaaa! Oh, my!; 11/5/14, 11:10 AM
Anonymous said...: GlenR talks about those who favor liberty & negative rights needing to win by more than the "margin of fraud." Now, if we could just get a few statisticians to do an analysis of this "margin of fraud" with the discipline we require of drug companies (double blind testing - so none-of-the parties involved in the test know what the desired outcome is - and if they happen to, say, randomly meet in an airport and discuss the trial and discover their mutual involvement even if they don't know themselves what the desired answer is - they still set it all aside (millions of dollars of activity) and start over.. which makes the AGW arguments over the results government-paid scientists derive amusing. After all, if you can't trust your government, who can you trust?)

I suspect the fraud is all on the left nowadays. To the point that a 1% win is now the same as a 5-10% mandate. So winners on the right can just assume this by default and move more aggressively than they could if the electorate was really closely divided and you were selected based on a coin-flip. Which is what you get from public choice theory once the mission (usually created in crisis) fades and the institutional self-survival dominates.

This belief that elections are rigged is so pervasive (on the losing side), and so bad for civil society that I'd like to believe the left and right could come together to make sure elections have the fidelity of the average bank account. Just to start earning back some small amount of trust in government and the democratic process.; 11/5/14, 11:24 AM
ThreeSheets said...: It's also a problem of assuming people vote as expected by pundits/advisers.

I can't imagine the thousands of teachers who quit the union as soon as Act 10 freed them were really going to vote for Burke. What I can imagine is those teachers wouldn't say that publicly so the union thinks they can win by getting them to turnout to the polls.; 11/5/14, 11:35 AM
Anonymous said...: re: amnesty. If they can close the border for a year they can then sell a compromise (unlimited professionals, investors and company owners, limited family - i.e. direct family not relatives, an earned-amnesty program for those who are contributing more than they consume, and a guest worker program). Perhaps even prior to the 2016 election. Both sides get something. Same as is happening in Australia now that they've been able to shut down the smugglers. A win-win.

The right is fortunate that they have a short opportunity starting now to close the borders for health reasons. Not Ebola - but as soon as they do a little DNA analysis they'll be able to prove our current open borders for children policy has led directly to deaths of a dozen citizens, and polio-like paralysis for dozens more children. Something that couldn't have happened (given the nature of today's government paid science anywhere near close to a political priority) until there was a clear political change.; 11/5/14, 11:52 AM
President-Mom-Jeans said...: The butt hurt is strong with Dieterich today.

Walker 3
Bug eyed boozehounds 0; 11/5/14, 12:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Does this mean that you are now on board with voter ID laws

Always have been on board with that idea, but am not on board with the ALEC bill which was written for Wisconsin.

Among other things, it doesn't allow for Military Veteran's ID to be used and I am very much against disenfranchising our veterans. I made several suggestions, in this very forum, of how to improve our Voter ID law. I never said it should be repealed.; 11/5/14, 6:05 PM