U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-03-2009, 10:56 AM
 
Location: 32°19'03.7"N 106°43'55.9"W
7,936 posts, read 16,690,759 times
Reputation: 6841

Advertisements

Not a big deal made out of it, but this portends political defeat for Republicans in November:

New Jersey's primary election participation rate was a low 10 percent - NJ.com

10% voter turnout in a competitive primary is pathetic. This indicates to me there aren't very motivated Republican voters in NJ.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-03-2009, 10:57 AM
 
Location: NJ
12,284 posts, read 30,812,478 times
Reputation: 5188
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJphillyfan View Post
Never said they were, but that doesn't mean a 3rd party candidate can't take away votes from either of the two main candidates.
we're not talking about "could" or "should", we're talking about past elections - you said 90% of democrats voted in the past, what are the other republicans doing on election day if only 60% are at the polls?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2009, 10:59 AM
 
Location: NJ
12,284 posts, read 30,812,478 times
Reputation: 5188
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike0421 View Post
Not a big deal made out of it, but this portends political defeat for Republicans in November:

New Jersey's primary election participation rate was a low 10 percent - NJ.com

10% voter turnout in a competitive primary is pathetic. This indicates to me there aren't very motivated Republican voters in NJ.
you're misleading. I'd say most demos didn't vote b/c honestly there was nothing to vote for. Many more republicans voted, but still lower than the last 4 elections. Overall it's 10%, but the % of dems is going to be A LOT lower than repub.

I know in our town 44% of registered repubs voted yesterday.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2009, 10:59 AM
 
Location: Stirling, NJ (Southern Morris County)
199 posts, read 456,263 times
Reputation: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by tahiti View Post
we're not talking about "could" or "should", we're talking about past elections - you said 90% of democrats voted in the past, what are the other republicans doing on election day if only 60% are at the polls?
I never said that. It was a different person. I used third parties as one of the possibilities as to where some registered Republican votes are going. Either way, this is an irrelevant debate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2009, 11:01 AM
 
Location: Stirling, NJ (Southern Morris County)
199 posts, read 456,263 times
Reputation: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike0421 View Post
Not a big deal made out of it, but this portends political defeat for Republicans in November:

New Jersey's primary election participation rate was a low 10 percent - NJ.com

10% voter turnout in a competitive primary is pathetic. This indicates to me there aren't very motivated Republican voters in NJ.
In what way? Only 53% of New Jersey's registered voters are Republicans or Democrats. 33% are Democrats, while 20% are Republicans. Do the math, and you'll see that Republican turnout was not bad at all (though worse than elections in the past). That may have something to do with the fact that it was well known that Chrisite would win. I wouldn't exactly call it "competitive", as Christie always had a strong lead in the polls.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2009, 11:01 AM
 
Location: NJ
12,284 posts, read 30,812,478 times
Reputation: 5188
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJphillyfan View Post
I never said that. It was a different person. I used third parties as one of the possibilities as to where some registered Republican votes are going. Either way, this is an irrelevant debate.
Sorry for mistaking you.

It is relevant because it shows that voter apathy is huge. People like to complain, but won't do anything about it. "Poor me" syndrome.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2009, 11:08 AM
 
Location: 32°19'03.7"N 106°43'55.9"W
7,936 posts, read 16,690,759 times
Reputation: 6841
Quote:
Originally Posted by tahiti View Post
you're misleading. I'd say most demos didn't vote b/c honestly there was nothing to vote for. Many more republicans voted, but still lower than the last 4 elections. Overall it's 10%, but the % of dems is going to be A LOT lower than repub.

I know in our town 44% of registered repubs voted yesterday.
The article, however, states that the number of GOP voters was lower than in all four gubernatorial primaries between 1989 and 2001.

Another question begs to be asked: is there less motivation, or are there simply fewer residents living in NJ that identify with the GOP, relative to 1989, or even 2001? Have many of these people simply moved to Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Florida, or New Mexico?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2009, 11:14 AM
 
Location: Stirling, NJ (Southern Morris County)
199 posts, read 456,263 times
Reputation: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike0421 View Post
The article, however, states that the number of GOP voters was lower than in all four gubernatorial primaries between 1989 and 2001.

Another question begs to be asked: is there less motivation, or are there simply fewer residents living in NJ that identify with the GOP, relative to 1989, or even 2001? Have many of these people simply moved to Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Florida, or New Mexico?
First of all, I can guarantee you that there are less Republicans in NJ now than there were back in the 90's. Again, only 20% of registered voters are Republicans. Also, like I said before, it's a stretch to call this race competitive. It really only began to become somewhat close over the last few weeks, and even so, Chrisite always had a strong lead in the polls. It was never really in doubt that he would be the nominee. Not a lot of motivation, there. This also doesn't account for the fact that just under half of the state's voters are independent, and you've got to think the majority will be for Chrisite (simply because he's not Corzine, if nothing else).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2009, 11:27 AM
 
607 posts, read 776,220 times
Reputation: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by DowntownJerseyCity View Post
...and sometimes inexperience is a good thing.

If the angry bearded clown with the sweater vest wins this election, I will be thoroughly convinced that New Jersey has the dimmest voters on the planet.

This isn't about Bush, Cheney, or ********, as Corzine preached last night, but rather, this is about getting NJ back on track. Creating jobs, ebbing the mass exodus of Jersey residents, curbing a soul crushing income tax, curbing property taxes that are so insane that people in other states think I am kidding when I tell them a lot of homes are approaching/have approached five figures.

Will Christie save NJ? Probably not, but anything has to be better than the 19 ring goat rodeo that's running this state into the ground now. There needs to be a clear understanding that the social issues (gay marriage, abortion, gun control, etc...) need to be put on the back burner this time around, because we are faced with a fiscal crisis.

I always study each candidate (Dem, GOP, others) and cast my vote from there, regardless of political affiliation. This time around my vote seems more important because this plane is hurtling towards the side of the mountain at breakneck speed. I will sadly vote Christie since I am absolutely disgusted with the whole program and he's just the lesser of two dim bulbs.

I literally LOL'd when I heard Bumbling Biden call Jonny Boy "America's Governor". America's Governor? Holy hell, in what nightmare?
And this follows my post in another thread. Why is it the REPUBLICANS who are at fault in New Jersey, when the DEMOCRATS have controlled the statewide offices during, essentially, GW Bush's term?

Corzine undoubtedly blames the last 8 years of national issues on Bush and his party.

Why are we not able to do the same to Corzine and HIS party for the state's troubles?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2009, 11:50 AM
 
1,074 posts, read 1,735,142 times
Reputation: 1258
With all of Corzine's money and the mentality of the voters in NJ can he lose? Can Christie capture enough of the independent and democratic votes to beat him? I sure hope so, but am really doubtful.

I can't see Christie winning the vote in Newark, Trenton, Camden or Jersey City. Voter turnout will be crucial in November. Yesterday's turnout was disgraceful.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:28 AM.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top