3 ms·

"but a record for neither". Incorrect. Trump got more primary votes than any Republican in history. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/1/donald-trump

• robotresearcher 10y ago
  Turnout is the number of votes cast, not the number cast for a single person. Rep turnout was not a record. Trump's votes received were indeed a Rep record.
  • jakeogh 10y ago
    As a share of eligible voters, Rep turnout does appear to be a record. 14.8%(2016) vs 11.8%(1980) http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/06/FT_16.06.08_primaryTurnout.png http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/20...
    • dragonwriter 10y ago
      National primary turnout (as a whole or for any one party) is neither really meaningfully comparable across elections (because of changes in methodology of particular primaries, changes in timing between primaries, differences in the course of elections which change the perceived value of voting in later primaries, etc.) nor predictive of general election turnout (so pointing to primary turnout as evidence of a party's or its nominee's strength in the general election is meaningless.)
    • robotresearcher 10y ago
      Oops, you are right! I misread that graph. I'm sorry - you are absolutely right. My eye followed those curves backwards and mixed them up. Thanks for a polite correction :)