Now
Overcast
34°
High
34°
Low
11°

Nebraska Democrats battle GOP numbers

Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By DON WALTON / Lincoln Journal Star

Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 - 12:12:16 am CST

Nebraska Democrats trust in  James Thurber.

“There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else,” the wry essayist once wrote.

So the latest evidence of declining Democratic voter registration fortunes in Nebraska should be viewed more as challenge or opportunity than death warrant, Democrats say.

Story Photo
Sen. Ben Nelson shakes hands with supporters Arson Rayford (left) and Dorothy Echols-Rayford after accepting his 2006 victory over Republican challenger Pete Ricketts. (LJS File)

And, in fact, they can lob some numbers back in return.

Here are the newest December voter registration figures for Lincoln:

Republicans, 65,399

Democrats, 55,338

Independents: 28,203

In Lancaster County, the Republican registration margin over Democrats has risen from about 4,300 in 1999 to nearly 14,000 this month.

Daunting.

Here’s the Democratic response:

Chris Beutler, 24,993

Ken Svoboda, 24,104

Those are the numbers that elected Beutler, a Democrat, over Svoboda, a Republican, in May’s nonpartisan race for mayor.

But look at these statewide voter registration numbers:

Republicans, 572,869

Democrats, 370,600

Independents, 187,004

The Republican registration advantage over Democrats has jumped from 145,000 in 2000 to 202,000.

Overwhelming.

Here’s the Democratic response:

Ben Nelson, 378,388

Pete Ricketts, 213,928

Those are the numbers that re-elected Nelson, a Democrat, over Ricketts, a Republican, in the 2006 Senate race.

“We believe Nebraskans vote more for the candidate than the party,” says Eric Fought, the Democratic Party’s state communications director.

“We find there’s a strong independent streak among Nebraska voters.”

That may be true, but Nelson is a lonely Democratic exception this decade.

Republicans won landslide gubernatorial elections in 2002 and 2006.  Sen. Chuck Hagel was a landslide winner in 2002. 

Since 2000, Republicans have won all 12 elections for House seats, most of them by tidy margins.

Voter registration figures give Republicans an advantage, GOP State Chairman Mark Quandahl says, but that doesn’t mean the party takes elections for granted.

“We still have to offer citizens good, quality candidates that represent and reflect the values and principles of Nebraskans.”

And the growing GOP registration advantage over Democrats indicates more new voters identify with Republican principles, he says.

The 202,000 statewide advantage in the 2006 election was up sharply from 179,000 in 2004.

Since 2000, the number of registered Republicans has increased by 35,000, while the number of Democrats decreased by 22,000.

The number of registered independents jumped by 34,000 during that period.

The newest Lancaster County figures are: Republicans, 75,017; Democrats, 61,131; independents, 31,301.

“Although the Republican margin keeps increasing,” county Election Commissioner Dave Shively says, “the percentage of registered voters who are Republicans remains about the same.

“One thing I’m noticing is that younger voters are tending to register more as nonpartisan.”

Meanwhile, Democratic voters who changed their registration to vote for Tom Osborne in last year’s Republican primary election are gradually starting to shift back to their original party, Shively says.

Reach Don Walton at 473-7248 or dwalton@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Politics > Back to Top of Story

All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hjalmer wrote on December 30, 2007 7:30 am:
" This is a real problem for the future of Nebraska. More and more there is only a one sided discussion on any issue that leaves large chunks of Nebraskans without a voice. That exclusion has those folks leaving this State and taking their money and talents with them. This is most pronounced in the third district. The exodus from the West is shocking and a sad comment on the ability of Nebraskans to build for the future. "

R. Ality Check wrote on December 30, 2007 7:32 am:
" Many Nebraskans who are Democrats in their hearts and in the secrecy of the voting polls register as Republicans because it is the thing to do in Nebraska. Then they don't have to argue with people on the job or in Church. Nebraskans are very insecure people who don't want to give offense to their important and rich friends. Then again the voter registered as a Republican can vote for the least destructive "one-and-only-one" people and the most angry war mongers, and thereby protect our nation from such as them "

WCG wrote on December 30, 2007 8:58 am:
" Let's face it, a lot of Democrats have switched their party affiliation just so they could vote AGAINST someone in the Republican primaries. Even when Democrats are competitive in a race, they almost never have more than one serious candidate. So it's likely that the Democratic disadvantage isn't nearly as bad as it seems. After all, after seven years of Bush and his Republican supporters, do you really think that Nebraskans are dumb enough to want more of the same? Republican control of Washington - until just recently, all three branches of government - has been a complete and unmitigated disaster for our country. Even Nebraskans should be able to see that. And it's not a matter of conservative vs liberal, either. Borrow-and-spend fiscal policies, record-breaking budget deficits, and relentless attacks on our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and fundamental American principles (such as the rule of law, the separation of powers, and the separation of church and state) are NOT politically 'conservative,' by any reasonable definition of the word. "

whatever wrote on December 30, 2007 11:43 am:
" An interesting article, but let's put this in historical perspective. Since 1970 the following Democrats have served in the Senate. Ed Zorinsky, J.J. Exon, Bob Kerrey, Ben Nelson. All elected to multiple terms. Republican Senators Roman Hruska, Carl Curtis, Dave Karnes, Chuck Hagel. Governor on the Democrat side J.J. Exon, Bob Kerrey, Ben Nelson. Republican Governors Charles Thone, Kay Orr, Mike Johanns and Dave Heineman. In the House of Representatives clearly it's been largely dominated by Republicans with the exception of a few terms in the 2nd congressional district. Should we conclude then that since in the last 10 years or so the Republican Party has largely been in power that we can blame the decline in the quality of life and the economy in Nebraska from the farm to the small town to Lincoln largely on the Republican Party. While the one place in Nebraska, namely Omaha, that has thrived has had Democrat leadership to counter the ill effects of poor Republican leadership? One can also speculate that the acceleration of the "Brain Drain" has largely been under the watch of "enlightened" Republican Leadership. "

Mike McDermott wrote on December 30, 2007 12:38 pm:
" For the Nebraska Democratic Party to remain as silent as they have on issues pertinent to everyday Nebraskans indicates to me a clear need for a change in leadership. To keep doing the same things over and over and expecting different results is either truly insane or intentional. "

Lola wrote on December 30, 2007 2:16 pm:
" While voter registration numbers show a decline among registered Democrats in Nebraska, the Washington Post's web site (projects.washingtonpost.com) shows that Democratic presidential candidates had raised signficantly more money among Nebraskans than Republican presidential candidates -- $281,941 versus $138,774 -- through the third quarter of 2007. That $420,715 total was through 750 contributions, averaging $560 each. Take heart, Dems! "

Observation wrote on December 30, 2007 3:15 pm:
" Liberals do not win in Nebraska. "

politics make me sick wrote on December 30, 2007 5:01 pm:
" political nonsense should have been the title for this artical and the following comments. "

rac wrote on December 30, 2007 6:00 pm:
" No, "whatever", we cannot blame the decline in "quality of life and economic prosperity" (however you are defining these, and that's a whole other subject), on the "enlightened" Republican party. Much of what is perceived to be these things are happening at the local level, especially in the urban areas. Lincoln has had a culture of driving away business and catering to inconsequential business for a number of years, mostly while under Democratic rule. Omaha, on the otherhand, has also been under Democratic rule, as you pointed out, but has been much more proactive in bringing in business and progressing economically and socially. I would submit to you it is more the engrained local culture in communities that is the problem, not one political party or the other. Rural issues have suffered mostly at the hands of national food and fuel issues, and small family farmers not being able to adapt to the new economic conditions, not because Republicans are 'keeping them down'. The available Farm Subsidies should be evident of that, and that is largely a by-product of Republicans (unfortunately). As for the "Brain Drain", Nebraska Republicans were the ones who pushed through the tax-break legislation to bring in new business to the State, and high-tech business in particular, much to the aingst of Democrats. Still local cultural issues and protesting by Democrats have made this only moderately successful. Until the business culture changes, the Brain-Drain will continue. It's Republican business interests in Lincoln that are trying to invigorate the high-tech business growth by helping to create a research tech-park with expansion of UNL into State Park, and once again, liberals are trying to stop that also. There's plenty of blame to go around for these problems, but to try to paint it as a Republican caused problem is quite absurd.

Nice try, though. "

Dale Gribble wrote on December 30, 2007 9:53 pm:
" Hjalmer: liberal dems leaving the state? Music to my ears! How can we make the rest of them leave? "

One more year wrote on December 30, 2007 10:47 pm:
" One more year until Nebraska and the its Red state republicans become as marginalized and unimportant as the nation's democrats have been for the last seven years. However, unlike the repbulicans who have had power over the last seven years, the democrats will achieve policy vitories that help every american not just oil companies and billionaires. ONE MORE YEAR AND THE REPUBLICANS WILL BE GONE "

Pinko wrote on December 31, 2007 8:38 am:
" Liberals don't win in Nebraska because there are no liberals in Nebraska. The debate has been pushed so far to the right that if we actually saw a real liberal he'd be tarred and feathered by the media for being a communist... "

Response wrote on December 31, 2007 8:45 am:
" Walton's the right man to give the "Democratic response", since he's more of a Democrat than he is a journalist. "

rac criticizes.. wrote on December 31, 2007 9:26 am:
" The local Democratic party, but if I'm not mistaken, haven't both the local and state level of government operated on a balanced budget and even surpluses rather than borrow and spend like the so called Conservatives? The Chinese will own us soon thanks to irresponsible Republican spending by the party formerly known as "Conservatives". "

A Havelock Kid wrote on December 31, 2007 3:09 pm:
" I have been a registered Democrate all my voting life but my party on the National level has swung to far to the left and I no longer can support this party. I'll be registering as an Independent and intend to vote Republican in the coming election. "

I won't vote wrote on December 31, 2007 10:26 pm:
" ALL politicians are robbers, they should be outlawed.
Won't waste the $$$ in gas it takes to go vote. "

Steve wrote on January 2, 2008 11:38 am:
" This bodes well for the GOP's chances here in 2008. "