Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: C19fan

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.


7 posted on 06/29/2018 6:07:04 AM PDT by msrngtp2002 (Just my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: msrngtp2002
Well, a crushing defeat should also involve an active campaign instead of just a bunch of yard and highway signs which was pretty much what he outspent her 10 to 1 on. Sending a surrogate to the debate wasn't the wisest decision as it allowed her to shine, and for others to imagine he didn't care if he won or not.

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.

26 posted on 06/29/2018 6:18:50 AM PDT by kingu (Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: msrngtp2002

“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.


29 posted on 06/29/2018 6:19:35 AM PDT by BeauBo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: msrngtp2002

Only 28,000 votes were cast.


44 posted on 06/29/2018 6:29:51 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: msrngtp2002
hardly indicative of a wave...

That’s Nancy Pelosi’s spin on it. ”Pay no attention to what just happened! It means nothing!”

46 posted on 06/29/2018 6:31:36 AM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: msrngtp2002

In 2016 179000 voters turned out in NY 14. This Tuesday it was 27000. Apathy wins. Apathy also elected DeBlasio.


53 posted on 06/29/2018 6:39:16 AM PDT by xkaydet65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: msrngtp2002

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.


62 posted on 06/29/2018 6:48:26 AM PDT by Kozy (new age haruspex; "Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: msrngtp2002

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.


63 posted on 06/29/2018 6:48:54 AM PDT by AFret.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: msrngtp2002

The voter turnout was indicative of racism.


67 posted on 06/29/2018 6:56:52 AM PDT by Louis Foxwell (Islam is Satan's finest work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: msrngtp2002; All

“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.


72 posted on 06/29/2018 7:07:40 AM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: msrngtp2002

She is a flea. The older party members will sweep her away come next election.


83 posted on 06/29/2018 12:12:42 PM PDT by minnesota_bound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson