Voter Turnout Drops During 2012 Primary Season
By Shawn M. Griffiths | 08/13/2012 | Elections 2012, Electoral Reform, Headline | 19 Comments
Credit: The Daily Beast
Compared to other presidential elections, 2008 was an exceptional year in voter participation. Many states saw turnout records broken during the primary election season. Some analysts considered this a high point in our democratic process, but it was far from a trend setter.
Historically, turnout in primaries and caucuses have always been low. The highest turnouts are typically during the years where the presidential races are most competitive, such as 1988 and 2000, but even then turnout is only highest during the early primary contests and gradually dwindle as the races appear, to the voters, to be settled.
Despite the most competitive years, participation in the primary election season during presidential elections has been on a gradual decline. The bumps we saw in 1988 and 2000 were only about two percentage points higher than the election before and then drop again four years later.
What made 2008 so extraordinary was that there was an overall turnout rate higher in every primary than any election since 1972 and the average participation across the country was eight percentage points higher than subsequent elections.
Other factors can help boost turnout, including an electorate that is weary of war. One of the highest voter turnouts during a primary election season was in 1968. Back then, only about a third of the states had primaries or caucuses, but voter participation was high in those that did. One of the key reasons was the Vietnam War.
Forty years later, the United States was engaged in two military conflicts. On top of that, the country was experiencing recession, unemployment was on the rise, and Americans were looking for change in Washington. Add to that the highly contested race in the Democratic Party that pitted the first viable female presidential candidate against the first viable black presidential candidate.
2008 provided the “perfect storm” to bring voters to the polls, but these record-breaking numbers are still far from earth shattering. Connecticut had 20% of the state electorate show up for their primaries and it was considered a record high turnout. Forty states plus Washington, D.C are primary election states. Twenty-four of these states reported record turnouts. Three of them had participation numbers over 40%.
Four years later, Americans are still uncertain about the current state of the economy, unemployment is still above 8%, and Republicans were supposed to come out in droves to send a message to the current administration. Instead, the turnout numbers this year returned to the abysmal levels we are accustomed to.
The presidential race sets the tone for the primary season. Democrats aren’t as excited about Barack Obama as they were in 2008 and no feasible candidate challenged him for the party’s nomination. The GOP field never really satisfied Republicans. The politicians people wanted to get into the race didn’t. There were so many debates, front runner shifts, and so much mudslinging many voters were ready for the nomination process to be over by the end of February.
Many of these primaries across the country have more on the line than just committing delegates to presidential candidates. There are state and local party nominations to vote on as well as congressional and senate seats. Primaries are important because they decide who the candidates will be in the general election for races that have an impact on all levels of government.
In Texas, total voter participation among registered voters was 16.33%. Approximately 71.47% of the voting age population was registered to vote. This number will rise for the general election in November, but it is difficult to speculate on how much. In 2008, the number of registered voters between the primaries and the general election increased by just under five percentage points, but the percentage of registered voters that participated in the primaries was close to double that of this year’s turnout.
GOP candidates in statewide races only needed about 5.76% of total registered voters to win their race and avoid a runoff. To win the Democratic nomination in any race a candidate only needed roughly 2.57%. Texans voted on party nominations for elected positions in the state’s Executive Branch, courts, Board of Education, congressional offices, and an important senate race. Let’s not forget seats in the Texas Legislature.
Most political pundits will agree that primaries are an important part of the democratic process. Why don’t voters feel the same way?
Two of the biggest factors that drive voter participation in any election, whether it’s primary or general; mid-term or presidential, is perception and motivation. The media helps drive public perception and perception helps drive motivation.
New Hampshire is the first primary of the year and generally gets a substantial amount of media coverage. The media covers the early contests much more extensively than those that come later in the primary election season. The state also typically has the highest turnout of any other primary. The primaries that usually get the most media attention also get the most participation from voters. If the media is not focused on it then people generally don’t care.
There have been a number of solutions proposed to help boost voter participation in primary election seasons. 2008 was an exceptional year in voter turnout because the Democratic race lasted until the end and kept voter interest up. Rolling out primaries instead of clustering early contests together (essentially what creates Super Tuesday) is one idea. Races would last longer and each state would get an increase in media coverage.
Voters don’t have much of a reason to be enthusiastic. People flocked to polls four years ago under promises of change to the status quo, and change hasn’t happened. Voters collectively feel more disenfranchised today than they have in decades.
We have a Congress that won’t do anything because of partisan gridlock. We have two sides conveying a message to voters of why they should hate the other side instead of why people should vote for theirs. People can’t get motivated because they don’t feel like they can make a difference. They think the status quo can’t be changed and the media hasn’t done anything to help change this.
There isn’t just one solution to boosting voter participation in both primary and general elections, but a better informed electorate is a step in the right direction. Voters are motivated by perception, and if the media puts a heavier emphasis on the importance of these primaries then public interest is likely to be high.





Leave Your Comment →
19 Comments
Matt Metzner
08.13.2012
@mmetzner
Tough to say your vote doesn’t matter when such a small percentage of the electorate is deciding the outcomes.
Chad Peace
08.13.2012
@Chad_Peace
Well, your vote matters if you think a vote for either “side” is meaningful.
Nick Tripoli
08.13.2012
Closed primaries, ignorance of the electorate, laziness of the electorate, etc.
Chuk T Gilroy
08.13.2012
The final votes will be counted in Spain.
Ariel H Fradin
08.13.2012
Because only a crazy or stupid person could be enthusiastic about either of the mainstream candidates.
Trina West Moore
08.13.2012
Because ppl have learned that their votes really don’t count anyway! Obama even out sourced vote counting to another country. They are going to do what they want no matter what the ppl want. We no longer live in a free republic!!!
Lynn Baker
08.13.2012
MAYBE BECAUSE THIS IS AUGUST AND NOT NOVEMBER , SILLY !!
Steve McHugh
08.13.2012
One reason that is not often discussed is the fact that many of us are essentially excluded from the process of voting in the primaries. Those people whose states are front-loaded into the primary voting schedule (such as Idaho, New Hampshire, South Carolina) have a disproportionate amount of influence over which candidates will be able to move forward with their compaigns. However, those of us whose states are rear-loaded into the process (like my state, North Carolina), have virtually no impact on the presidential primaries. By the time that the primaries get to us in late Spring, the contest is, for all practical purposes, already decided. It is a very unfair process, and I have been writing to my elected representatives about this for years. I DO vote in the primaries, but I very much resent the fact that my vote is insignificant in terms of the presidential primaries.
Shawn M. Griffiths
08.13.2012
@shawntx
I appreciate you elaborating on this because I touched on it some with proposed solutions, but you are absolutely right. Unless it is a very contested race most nomination races are pretty much decided by or around Super Tuesday because of front-loading. The average percentage rate was only slightly declining in the primary election season before 1988, but actual number of voters that participated was fairly high. 1988 was the first year there was a Super Tuesday. There was a slight bump in the national average for voter turnout but the decline in participation became worse and fell dramatically the next election. Front-loading primaries has weakened the nomination process. I absolutely agree.
Andrew Lopert
08.13.2012
I agree with Steve; here in New Jersey, our primary was held June 5th. By then, only Mitt Romney & Ron Paul hadn’t dropped out yet out of the 7 candidates on the ballot. If somebody doesn’t like either of those two, why vote?
Jeff Justice
08.13.2012
Voters do not know of better alternative party options becuase of media bias/media blackout.
Stacy Alexander Dill
08.13.2012
Why did they even have a Democratic primary? I know the answer but that is why turn-out is low. It was a foregone conclusion. Many Republicans just feel like it doesn’t really matter: ABO and its all the same anyway…
Tina Stephens
08.13.2012
It’s all fraud anyhow. They change the counts anyway so what’s the point???
Judy Ferro
08.13.2012
Because the average voter spends less than an hour a month thinking about government and waits for their party to tell them who to vote for. National politics is all about who gets the 1% attention and funding. We won’t change anything until we start working local elections.
Henry Rauchweld
08.13.2012
The vote in November counts! Hope everyone here votes. Less then half the voters actually did vote in the last election. Imagine if everyone did.
Duncan Webb
08.13.2012
Parties need to be banned.
Duncan Webb
08.13.2012
Political parties are just like OPEC and other crime cartels.
Scott W. Trent Jr.
08.13.2012
Because AMERICANS have YET TO LIVE UNDER A DICTATOR!!! once they do, IT may change???
Ray Smith
08.14.2012
because for the most part, the American public is stupid!