There's been a lot of talk in recent days about voter interest (or lack thereof) and possible turnout on June 9. I tend to agree with Marc Fisher, who writes:The beauty of this primary is that despite the torrent of money, despite the yammering on national talk shows desperate for political topics in a year in which only Virginia and New Jersey have elections, no one knows who will come out. Amazingly, more than 90 percent of Virginians are likely to leave this choice to someone else. Those few voters get to deliver the surprise.I've got to say, I find it completely pathetic that we all will consider it "good turnout" if 15% or 20% turn out to vote on June 9. Sorry, but as someone who believes that the voting is a a fundamental right of being an American citizen, I find the concept that 80% or 90% (or even more) of people will choose NOT TO VOTE in an important election to be absolutely disgraceful. For instance, in 2005, I found it embarrassing when there was only 2.6% turnout for the Democratic LG primary between Leslie Byrne, Chap Petersen, Viola Baskerville and Phil Puckett. In 2006, I found it beyond embarrassing when there was just 3.5% turnout in a primary for U.S. Senate.
This year, after the tremendous enthusiasm for the Democratic primary in 2008, I sure hope we can do a LOT better than 10% or 20% and that I don't have to feel embarrassed yet again. C'mon, Virginia, let's go for at least 30% or 40% this time around! :)
P.S. In today's Washington Post, Steve Jarding predicts "no more than 200,000 voters at the polls June 9." That would be utterly pitiful. Even the 350,000 voters predicted by McAuliffe's strategists would really lame. Personally, I'd like to see 500,000 votes cast on June 9, although I realize that this is unlikely. But with 5 million registered voters in Virginia, I fail to see why it's not possible.
