Posted on 01/12/2021 6:03:32 PM PST by mr_hammer
Years where there is not an presidential election typically have a lower number of registered voters, so it probably makes more sense to compare with 2016. In 2016 the number of registered voters was 157.6 million.
Now assuming a 90% voter turnout the registered voter count would have needed to go from 157.6 to 172 million in four years. That’s a big increase, but I don’t think it is unheard of. For example, consider the period from 2000 to 2004. In 2000 there were a 129.55 million registered voters while in 2004 there were 142.07 million. This amounts to a
[(142.07/129.55)^(1/4) - 1]*100% = 2.33%
annual growth rate from from 2000 to 2004.
On the other hand, in order to obtain 172 million registered voters in 2020 we would need an annual growth rate of
[(172/157.6)^(1/4) - 1]*100% = 2.21%
from 2016 to 2020. This is smaller than the annual growth rate from 2000 to 2004, and therefore does not appear to be all that anomalous.
I think you see this sort of thing when both sides are highly motivated, e.g. the 2004 election which the Rs won and the 2020 election which the Rs lost.
I obtained my numbers here:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/273743/number-of-registered-voters-in-the-united-states/
Outstanding!😀
Racist! Fascist!
< /sarc>
Pretendident Biden
No, that looks too valid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.