What's up with the turnout this election?

[fujiyama]

I'm still surprised by the huge difference in total votes between this time and last time. Obama looks to have lost ~9.5 million between '08 and '12.

Hell, Romney may not even get as many votes as McCain did (btw, some RW blogs claim this is due to fraud and wait wait - vote switching in e-voting - funny stuff).

Not that any of this really matters. We won - and decisively at that (close to a 2.8-3 million difference popular votes and 332 EV), but I still find it crazy that so many people just decided to skip this election. It would be nice to at least see Obama beat Bush's '04 popular vote total.

[Drunken Irishman]

1. Turnout was lower, but still higher than '00, '96, '88, '84, '80, and '76.

[graham4anything]

2. i blame ralph nader the traitor for this

Ralph Nader in 2000 and 2004 kept telling people both parties are the same
He did so again in 2008 and 2010
People(some of them) heard it enough and voila, they opted out of the system

ALSO-I am sure hurricane sandy probably kept a million voters in the east from voting (esp. As most of those states were sure signs

ALSO-we have no idea if all the early votes/absenttee are included in those totals

And then there are the lazy SOB's who want to have others do their work (hey, that describes Mitt) and they don't vote

Also-as not all votes are in yet, we don't know the final count

Who knows, it may be alot more than it says

[UCmeNdc]

3. Maybe with the GOP cutting voting days and voting times plus Sandy caused this?

[krawhitham]

4. It will take a month to get all the vote counted

absentee and provisional votes take time

[bornskeptic]

5. Most of the difference from 2008 comes from five very blue states.

Apparently there are a ton of votes in Washington and California which haven't been counted. CNN says California is 69% in and Washington 55%. The current totals are over 4 million short of 2008 in California and about a million short in Washington. Another 3 million is accounted for by the states most affected by Sandy. New York is 1.5 million short, Connecticut way over a million short, and New Jersey half a million short of 2008.

[bornskeptic]

6. While I was posting CT total went up by over a milion. N/T

[Laura PourMeADrink]

7. wow...good info..do you have data on each state? I would be totally surprised if turnout was

the same as 2008, where I am, in TX. The buzz was close to zero here. No money spent by Obama nor I imagine RobMe either.

The campaign meetings I went to in 2008 were so exciting. There were hundreds and hundreds of people and volunteers. We had rallies and did lots of door to door. We had people standing with Obama signs at every precinct on election day.

This time, nothing. The meetings I went to - we had maybe 10 people, max. And most all our phone calls were to FL voters.

It was disappointing from the fun and excitement perspective - of a vibrant campaign. I totally understand why it was like this....why waste any money here.

But, I would have bet a lot that it would have played a major roll in suppressing turnout.

[bornskeptic]

9. At this point the total in Texas is around 100,000 short of 2008,

which isn't much difference in a state with about 8 million people voting. CNN estimates 96% of the votes are in, so it's very likely the 2012 turnout in Texas will be higher than in 2008 when everything is counted.

I use this website for past results.

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/

It has 2012 results, but doesn't keep up when totals are updated, so I use CNN for current numbers.

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president

[Laura PourMeADrink]

8. Are they through counting in Miami area?