Doesn’t a crushing defeat require substantial voter participation? It is my understanding that while the percentages were high the turnout was very low and this woman won by only about a 5000 vote margin...hardly indicative of a wave, but perhaps of voter apathy.
Plus of course there's the liberal bias against a white male.
Low turn out for a primary is hardly anything new. Last I saw, she was ahead by about 4100 votes, which will likely squeeze down a bit more when more absentee ballots are counted with a little bounce from provisional ballots. My own rat lizard of a congressman pulled down over twice the amount of votes of both of the candidates in this story to put it in more perspective. In theory both primaries should have an equal number of voters but looking historically, non-presidential years seem to be around this range.
He went the road of Hillary Clinton; self assured that he'd handily win the election, didn't bother to campaign, didn't push a GOTV effort, got fired by the people he represents. Now he'll enjoy his congressional retirement and probably think about picking up a senatorial bonus to further feather his nest.
“the turnout was very low and this woman won by only about a 5000 vote margin...hardly indicative of a wave, but perhaps of voter apathy.”
Only 10% turnout, in the Bronx, which is usually the most heavily Democratic County in the entire country. NYC is a hotbed of hard core communists, and it would be easy for them across the city to hop the subway and vote for a comrade in the Bronx, if the Party asked. It might indicate a trend, but it is more likely to be an outlier.
Only 28,000 votes were cast.
That’s Nancy Pelosi’s spin on it. ”Pay no attention to what just happened! It means nothing!”
In 2016 179000 voters turned out in NY 14. This Tuesday it was 27000. Apathy wins. Apathy also elected DeBlasio.
No! No! It’s a wave, a mighty wave sweeping the democratic party, sweeping America. Run to high ground or be swept out to sea. Socialism is crashing on our shores. It has infected New York and California. Time for Republicans to embrace the bartender as the face of the democratic-socialist party. The new day has dawned.
Doesn’t a crushing defeat require substantial voter participation? It is my understanding that while the percentages were high the turnout was very low and this woman won by only about a 5000 vote margin...hardly indicative of a wave, but perhaps of voter apathy.
I just read that her district has 700,000 residents...only 16,800 voted....ripple perhaps, but hardly a wave.
The voter turnout was indicative of racism.
“hardly indicative of a wave, but perhaps of voter apathy”
Turnout was very light.
The electorate had only a radical socialist and an old-school machine politician to choose from.
Ominous harbinger for Democrats. All the energy rests with the Social Justice Warriors, along with most of the votes.
White people continue to flee them.
She is a flea. The older party members will sweep her away come next election.