First look: Dems crush GOP in party registration

First look: Dems crush GOP in party registration

Too bad there isn't a 2018 US Elections forum. Ah well. I'll just post this here instead. So it looks like Axios collected data on party voter registrations up to today and Democrats are CRUSHING it.

Here's some interesting bits about why this is important:

Key numbers: Among the 31 states (plus D.C.) with party registration, there are nearly 12 million more registered Democrats than Republicans.

40% of all voters in party registration states are Democrats, 29% are Republicans, and 28% are independents.

In 19 states (plus D.C.) there are more registered Democrats; in the remaining 12 there are more registered Republicans.

This can make all the difference. A quick look back to 2016 shows Trump won 11 of those 12 states with more Republican registered voters.

I know there is this idea of #walkaway trending here recently, but the hard stats of reality are saying that the blue ranks are swelling.

Why would anybody vote Democrat right now? Serious question.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I did my part, by submitting my excel file filled with tens of thousands of fake and deceased voter information to my local democratic office.

a reply to: MisterSpock

That's cool. I'll just go ahead and report you for voter fraud then.

Can't wait to vote full Republican Nov ticket woop woop woop!

oh and all my millennial friends will be doing the same in Pennsylvania

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Since I like to look at the big picture, are these first-time registrations, or does it not differentiate between the two? I mean, people move and have to re-register all of the time, so pretending like these are in-addition-to-already-registered-voters registrations is rather presumptuous and based on nothing provided in the very, very short blurb that is apparently a teaser for the full story coming out on Thursday.

So, do you know the answer to that, or is it more accurate to say that this doesn't really mean anything as far as additional first-time voters goes considering the information provided?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
I know there is this idea of #walkaway trending here recently, but the hard stats of reality are saying that the blue ranks are swelling.

Actually, no, no the stats are not. You are just inferring that based on your hopes and dreams at this point.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Well you do have a 24/7 propaganda machine demonizing all opposition to Democrats. However, I don't think it will matter in the end. The DNC is too extreme and too worried about representing foreign nationals in the country illegally.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I don't know much about the numbers myself and I'm not trying to jump to conclusions and say this is a sign of things to come. I just wanted to counter the flawed idea of #walkaway.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

What's flawed about it?

a reply to: MisterSpock

It's not true. Democrat numbers are growing. Rapidly. They are actually growing faster than they were in 2008.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Technically though, if one person switches and uses the tag, it is true.

Maybe you should have worded that better. Like "it's not as wide of a phenomenon as many imply".

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I don't know much about the numbers myself and I'm not trying to jump to conclusions and say this is a sign of things to come. I just wanted to counter the flawed idea of #walkaway.

You absolutely did jump to conclusions, using this report to make the claim (or at least bolster it) that the Dems' numbers are swelling. I mean, you LITERALLY said that "the hard stats of reality are saying that the blue ranks are swelling."

This evidence is not reflective of your claim, at least not yet. Maybe we'll know more on Thursday.

a reply to: MisterSpock

I did word it differently. I said it was "flawed". You are the one splitting semantics over my meaning. You know damn well what I meant anyways (or should have I'm pretty sure you aren't that dumb).

a reply to: SlapMonkey

How is the evidence of people registering democrat over republican by a rather large margin not evidence of democrat ranks swelling? Explain yourself. Because all it looks like you are doing is saying, "Nope you are wrong because this isn't the full article."

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: MisterSpock

I did word it differently. I said it was "flawed". You are the one splitting semantics over my meaning. You know damn well what I meant anyways (or should have I'm pretty sure you aren't that dumb).

No, I'm not dumb, but I feel pretty dumb sometimes. It only seems to happen around here, when I read the political crap. I'll have to compile more data, I feel I'm close to reaching a conclusion.

a reply to: MisterSpock

For the record: You've been politically trolling me since you entered the thread. So if you are going to complain about political discourse then look in the mirror first.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: MisterSpock

It's not true. Democrat numbers are growing. Rapidly. They are actually growing faster than they were in 2008.

I mean, to be fair- most young people come out of school brainwashed to vote that way.
Ah, to be young.
Up here, we have to import democrats in all the way from Somalia. It's hard being a rural blue state.

i thought you said you were an independent? Why would you be cheerleading for Democrats I wonder? Does this help you sleep better at night thinking the evil Trumpian might not have support after midterms? Hint: He doesn’t have support now and he is still making America better and helping us recover from the failed policies of the last eight years.

i registered to Vote Democrat. 6 times, in 5 different states or was it 5 times in 6 states. IDK, the socialist in me, will do anything for a free T-shirt.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

question is, how many of the 40% registered are actually American citizens...

at the rate the democratic party is going, percentage doesn't mean squat.