January 19th, 2008
05:18 PM ET
7 years ago

More unprecedented turnout for Democrats

LAS VEGAS, Nevada (CNN) - Another contest, another day of record turnout for Democrats.

The Nevada Democratic Party reports that with 84 percent of the precincts reporting, they are seeing unprecedented turnout, with more than 107,000 caucus attendees.

This follows record turnouts for Democrats in the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary.

The numbers are unsurprising, given the fact that most national polls have indicated for quite some time that Democrats are incredibly energized about the 2008 presidential election.

Fewer than 10,000 people attended the 2004 Nevada caucuses, but that contest was much later in the primary season, with very little at stake.

The national Democratic Party decided to move up Nevada's date to the middle of January to make the state, which has a large union and Latino Democratic electorate, more of a primary season player.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was instrumental in moving his state's contest up earlier in the primary process.

He called today's turnout a "tremendous success."

–CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser

Filed under: Nevada
soundoff (66 Responses)
  1. David

    I am an African American male, and a long time Democrat who has voted in every presidential and senatorial election since I was 18 years old. If Hillary wins the nomination, I will vote for McCain, and a huge number of African Americans will protest the election, all because Hillary attacked a viable black candidate by using the "race card" and her supporters have been spewing more racist, venomous garbage than any republican would ever dare.

    Do you think you can win the general election if African Americans voted for McCain or just sat out all together? Considering all the independents who will go for Romney or McCain?

    I don't think so. I won't give my vote to Hillary and her racist supporters. Not in the general, and not ever. The Clinton's have shown their true colors.


    January 19, 2008 05:20 pm at 5:20 pm |
  2. Peter

    CNN, stop fooling us. This election is controlled!

    January 19, 2008 05:23 pm at 5:23 pm |
  3. Workingman

    Hilary's Experience

    Lets start at the beginning. Hillary headed the Young Republicans at Wellesley College and was a self described Goldwater girl. For those who don’t remember, Senator Goldwater was one of only six Republican Senators who joined Southern Democratic segregationists opposing the historic voting rights act of 1964 inspired by Martin Luther King.


    Hillary Clinton served on Wal-Mart's board of directors for six years when her husband was governor of Arkansas. Also, the infamous Rose Law Firm where she was a partner handled many of the company's legal affairs.

    Hillary Clinton was paid $1,500 for each Wal-Mart meeting she attended and accumulated at least $100,000 in Wal-Mart stock, according to Clinton's past federal financial disclosure forms.

    Hillary Clinton had kind words for Wal-Mart as recently as 2004, when she told an audience at the convention of the National Retail Federation that her time on the board "was a great experience in every respect."
    Of course Hilary Clinton now claim she used her position to urge the company to improve its gender and racial diversity, but neither she nor Wal-Mart will release minutes of the company's board meetings during her tenure.

    “There's no evidence she did anything to improve the status of women or make it a very different place in ways Mrs. Clinton's Democratic base would care about," said Liza Featherstone, author of “Selling Women Short: The Landmark Battle for Worker's Rights at Wal-Mart."

    As I tell my children, “you can tell a lot about a person by the people they associate with.”

    The Clinton's take credit for the economy of the late 1990s. That was of course because of the Internet boom that started in 1995 and went bust in 2000. We all made a ton of money. Everybody paid income tax on that money. That influx to the treasury also led to an income bubble for the Government. At least on paper, we had a short-term balanced budget. BIG DEAL!! That was a fluke the Clintons had nothing to do with.

    The Clinton's have proven to be a disaster for working people because of their policies.

    This workingman believes its time for change, not a return to past failures!!!!

    January 19, 2008 05:24 pm at 5:24 pm |
  4. mark bunyon

    People turn out in record numbers to vote against Clinton!

    January 19, 2008 05:24 pm at 5:24 pm |
  5. Ray

    But she keeps winning Mark...so...???

    January 19, 2008 05:33 pm at 5:33 pm |
  6. Christine

    What am I missing in the math? The Democrats say that more than 107,000 people turned out to vote but CNN as of 4:30 CST is reporting totals that add up to only about 10,000 votes counted with 89% of the precincts reporting.

    Where's the other 97,000 people? Gambling? Shut out?

    This doesn't pass the smell test.

    January 19, 2008 05:36 pm at 5:36 pm |
  7. Scott

    People shouldn't be all sore losers because Obama won. Remember, he had the largest Union in Nevada behind him. If he can't win with that, how can we expect the guy to win the general.

    I'll vote for Hillary.

    January 19, 2008 05:43 pm at 5:43 pm |
  8. Albert Savoy

    The early anti-Clinton crowd chimes in quickly. Sad for them, voters seem to think differently. Obama, still wet behind the ears (no physiognomic slur intended), just can't compete. Personally, I would vote for an experienced black, like Jesse Jackson. but not for an upstart (no "uppity" slur intended). Time, which Obama has not had, will show the man's true colors (no racial slur intended). See, how easy it is to take commonplace turns of phrase and construe them as racist. E.g. "not everything is black and white, or "son-and-so is the dark-horse candidate," and so on. Eveyone should get over playing the victim card and grow up (oops! no ageism slur intended).

    January 19, 2008 05:46 pm at 5:46 pm |
  9. Dijon

    Why blacks always think the world is against them?

    January 19, 2008 05:49 pm at 5:49 pm |
  10. Matt

    Hillary's "I support my union...I support Hillary" signs were genious.

    January 19, 2008 05:49 pm at 5:49 pm |
  11. BillyG

    I'm an Obama supporter too and I have not lost faith that he could still win this (nomination). But I'm not so naive as to think that both sides have made some unsavory moves, but they are competing and this is expected. To say that any Republican would represent us African Americans better than any Dem nominee is just juvenile. I hope that those spewing such nonsense see the light before the general. Those rooting for McCain over Clinton, I'm to assume you are for more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, that you don't support a woman's right to choose and you support the war.

    January 19, 2008 05:50 pm at 5:50 pm |
  12. Adam Freeman

    I'm glad there was record turnout. I personally wouldn't vote for Hilary but it is nice to see so many people voting.

    January 19, 2008 05:50 pm at 5:50 pm |
  13. Tammy

    Go Hillary!!!!!
    She's the only canidate that can get this country back on track.

    January 19, 2008 05:52 pm at 5:52 pm |
  14. barry setk

    The Clintons are not racist,PLEASE........The Obama camp, brought the race card up ,as quick as they pulled OPRAH UP OUT OF CHICAGO!!! Oprah is a big fat race card!!Thats what the oprah tour was about! Watch out for the CLINTON MACHINE,coming to a town near you!!!Clinton08

    January 19, 2008 05:52 pm at 5:52 pm |
  15. Rob

    Christine, CNN is reporting delegate counts, not voter counts.

    January 19, 2008 05:54 pm at 5:54 pm |
  16. tom skulan

    Does anyone realize that CNN shows only one tenth of the democratic vote cast? Or am I wrong in assuming the total democratic vote should add up to around a hundred thousand and not ten thousand as shown on CNN?

    January 19, 2008 05:58 pm at 5:58 pm |
  17. Mart from Chicago

    Just in case you Pro-Obama-ers didnt notice, 51% in Nevada did vote for Clinton. It is a stupid to say the big turnout was just to vote against her.

    For David who talks about Hillary playing the "race" card, READ the script of her speech, or listen to what Hillary said about MLK in her speech!!!! If you can understand english or read some english, you'll know she DID NOT say anything to provoke any African Americans. Somebody (and I bet its Obama's camp), made it out as if it is.

    Then to all those think the vote is rigged, this Nevada election DID NOT use whatever machines they use in New Hampshire, so you can't use ur stupid idea that the machines are hacked. And if you think its human error, I would say recount Iowa coz Obama won and I for one can't imagine how... Just because your favorite candidate lost, does not mean Hillary cheated. Why dont you call Iowa votes were rigged and chant recount?!? you guys are cry babies, and yet you can criticize Hillary for crying on TV. Grow up!! If you hate Clintons so much, go and be a republican... coz she is a Democrat, unlike Obama who wants to be a president like Reagan...

    January 19, 2008 05:58 pm at 5:58 pm |
  18. Alex

    Hillary played the race card? GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!! Barack Obama played the race card and played it heavy. I used to be employed by the Democratic party, and have started up two race relations foundations, but if Barack Obama wins the Democratic nomination, I will vote for John McCain. It has nothing to do with race, it has to do with experience. The man was barely in office two years before he started running for President. Sorry, but you can't change anything if you don't know what you are doing. Just look at Bill Clinton's first two years in office. Like it or not we are in two wars right now and the economy is tanking fast, we desperately need someone who knows how to get things done in Washington. That someone is Hillary Clinton.

    January 19, 2008 05:59 pm at 5:59 pm |
  19. Maria


    You seem a little too willing to cut off your nose to spite your face. Barack is the one who put a racist spin on the whole campaign, and people like you played right into his hands. Suggesting that 'the blacks' leave the Democratic Party sounds about as racist as you can get. Why don't you start your own 'we're going to be bitter as hell if Barack doesn't win' party? I thought Barack was all about unifying the country and putting an end to that kind of talk and thinking, but reading your comments make it quite clear that we are a long way from that happening, and that's because blacks are even more racist than whites these days. That's not quite the uplifting, healing talk that Barack keeps spouting. I guess it is all just talk. Until people like YOU change, there will never be a black president. Go ahead. Vote for 'the man'. And keep on with your bitter little campaign, because there's just as many idiots who will do the same if Barack wins the nomination, I'm sure. People, people. You'll get what you deserve. Are you even listening to the man you claim to support?

    January 19, 2008 06:00 pm at 6:00 pm |
  20. Eleanora

    Christine–for some reason CNN is posting the number of DELEGATES the Democrats received in Nevada, side by side with posting the number of VOTES in the GOP race.

    Makes it very difficult to read apples to apples, I hope they rethink that. Estimates for voter turnout in NV are 114,000 on the Democrat side at this point; no word on totals for the GOP, but looks like around 80,000-90,000.

    January 19, 2008 06:00 pm at 6:00 pm |
  21. Julie

    I agree with Christine above. What numbers? The numbers being broadcast by CNN show about 10,000 turning out for the Dems and 32,000 for the Republicans. And, on MSNBC, we were taken through an exhaustive analysis of the population centers in Nevada and told roughly 2 million people inhabit Clark County.


    So I'm glad turnout is enthusiastic, depending on whose numbers you believe, but the bottom line is, just a very few, VERY small percentage of the population turned out to vote in the only primary state so far that even remotely resembles the country, demographically.

    If it weren't for the media, Edwards would have a fighting chance. : (

    But I'm pleased to see the thrashing Ron Paul is giving Giuliani. ; )

    January 19, 2008 06:01 pm at 6:01 pm |
  22. Anonymous

    The vote is rigged

    January 19, 2008 06:02 pm at 6:02 pm |
  23. charlie

    Republican or Democrats, they are just two different faces representing the special interest. The poor and middle classes are always the victims. Clinton is a true face of politician, and can't be trusted. Remember Bill Clinton platform in 1992 election : "cut tax for the middle class". What did he do when being elected, raise the tax of the middle class. I vote for Obama, hopefully for a change but probably not much.

    January 19, 2008 06:03 pm at 6:03 pm |
  24. rudy w.

    Since congress elected a woman for speaker 2 years ago, the new political trend has been set, what trend? USA is ready for a white female president.

    51% USA's population is female, my wife is a female, she makes more than I do, she is very capable, personally I don't see anything wrong to elect a female president
    fir the first time in our history.

    Black, male or female, is not ready to set a new political trend yet, the trend requires
    ground up work, we saw other countries elected their woman presidents in the past
    decade,and they are (were) doing well so American man is prepared.

    Look at all black presidents in the world, they don't achieve much to convince non black population of USA to accept a black president, not yet, we need proven records
    to vote a black as our president, it takes time and the time has not arrived for black,.

    January 19, 2008 06:03 pm at 6:03 pm |
  25. a little sad

    mark bunyon January 19, 2008 5:24 pm ET

    "People turn out in record numbers to vote against Clinton!"

    Did they miss?

    January 19, 2008 06:04 pm at 6:04 pm |
1 2 3