Levels of white voter turnout went up from 1996 until 2004 also. Then they stabilized from 2004 until 2016.
Without a black president running in 2008 and 2012, the same may have happened with the black vote. Three cycles of increased voter turnout followed by 3 cycles of stagnant turnout.
The same thing kind of appears to have happened with Hispanics. Turnout increased from 96 until 2004, then went up again in 2008, then went back down to 2004 levels.
There’s a much steadier and greater rise in black voter turnout between 96 & 08. This is inarguable. There is no Obama spike in either of our graphs.
Black voter turnout went from about 54% up to 60% from 1996 to 2004.
Then it spiked up to about 66% when a black president was on the ticket.
Once he wasn’t on the ticket it dropped to 60% again.
You may see it as a linear increase that includes 2008 and 2012. I don’t. I’m assuming black turnout when there isn’t a black person running for president maxes out at around ~60%.
I don’t know for sure, but neither do you. However I wouldn’t be surprised if the democrats ran regular white candidates, if the black vote would’ve done what the white vote did and stay at a constant rate from 2004-2016.
Why did black turnout drop from nearly 67% in 2012 down to 60% in 2016?
It initially surprised me. Then I remembered that the world population is slightly over half Asian in US terms. We only have single digits as a percentage of our population. I assumed that probably produced a pretty big chunk of non-eligible when you start adding in things like student and work visas, let alone actual immigration.
I wasn’t curious enough to check if that actually was true. 
I really don’t get what you’re thinking or even saying at all. You are mixing up your numbers at least.
Turnout by Black voters:
96: 48.1
00: 52.9 (+4.8)
04: 61.4 (+8.5)
08: 69.1 (+7.8)
08 was not a spike unless it’s part of a spike that started before Obama. Which should have been obvious if you looked at the graph.
FYI, I remember in an older thread using this election project numbers and something was hinky in their adjustments.
Is it hard for you to figure out?
This is my argument: Black turnout was increasing from 96 to 04, but black turnout under normal conditions peaked in 2004. That is the peak black turnout in modern times assuming the first black president isn’t on the ballot.
When the first black president was on the ballot, black turnout went up about 5-7 points.
When the first black president wasn’t on the ballot then black voter turnout went back to its 2004 levels. Since there will never be another first black president, black turnout may stay at 60% for the next few cycles.
But we will have to look at turnout in 2020, 2024 and 2028 to see if black turnout continues to climb. It may climb in 2020, but I think dem turnout across the board will climb in 2020.
Either way, we’re getting off the OPs topic with this discussion.
Dude, you were saying the wrong godamn numbers. You are totally wrong. I am using your own cite to show it! 00-04 was a BIGGER RISE than (or at least statisticsally the same as) 04-08. Jesus.
You see a trend because you’re cherry picking numbers. If you start with the point when African Americans had the lowest turnout, of course it’s only going to rise from there. It’s similar to how conservatives would find a downward trend in global temperature by starting with a year when the temperature was the highest.
Five data points is not a great set from which to make inferences.
Trying to find trends in presidential elections is pretty futile in any case. With four years in between elections, you can hardly ever have enough data points to make reasonable conclusions.
At best it seems a bit like the couple who had a baby and graphed the kid’s 2 month, 4 month, and 6 month growth numbers, draw a best fit line, and predicted with confidence that the child would be 60 to 70 pounds at age 3 and and about 620 to 630 pounds by 31.
I was not inferring any trends myself. I was just saying you can’t call the '08 election a “spike” in black voter turnout.
Too bad, because yes you can and I will continue to do so. Because after the first black president wasn’t on the ballot anymore voter turnout went back to 2004 levels again. Hence in non-extraordinary elections (like the first black president) the black turnout may have peaked at 60%.
Either way, I don’t agree with you and you don’t agree with me.
You don’t seem to agree with the dictionary.
Well, you did say
which is true only if you call just two elections in a row, getting just barely higher than where it was in 1992, as “growing steadily”, which is , I think, rightly called out as a bit of a stretch. Really the only year that was a minimal eyebrow raise that was not an Obama year was the second election in a row increase in 2004.
But moving on. Anyone who can point me to any analysis of ethnic/racial voter turnout rates in which they controlled for age and/or education?
I’m wondering if controlling for age in particular explains a large portion of the relatively lower turnout of Black and Hispanic voters. For differing reasons both populations currently average younger adult voter ages than do Whites with Hispanic eligible voters being overwhelmingly Millennials and Blacks having had a shorter life expectancy than Whites and with a larger cohort just now aging into their 50s and 60s. Given that even 30 to 44 y.o. voters overall vote less than 60% the youth of the populations may be the bigger drivers with race and ethnicity merely being overlaid on top of that. The gap in mortality between White and Black is closing and one consequence of that may be that there may be more years in which Black turnout is as good as White turnout is or better, even without an Obama on the ticket.
I’m having trouble finding info where they break down different racial minorities by age and education. It would be interesting to read.
This is the closest I can find for now.
Alabama in 2017 with Moore. 20% of voters were non-whites who do not have college degrees, 14% are non-whites with a college degree. The vast majority of non-whites in Alabama who voted are black.
This older stat (2002) claims that 17% of blacks have a bachelors degree, but only 12% of blacks in Alabama have one.
https://cber.cba.ua.edu/rbriefs/ab2003Q2_education.pdf
This claims 22% of blacks have a bachelors degree as of 2015.
So who knows what % of blacks in Alabama have a bachelors degree. Maybe 16-20%? However blacks with a bachelors degree made up 41% of all blacks who voted in the election. If you assume voter turnout is about the same across the US, you’d see something similar. I know in general turnout among people w/o a college degree is about 40-50% while it is 70-80% for those with.
Moving on, about 140 million people voted in 2016.
Latinos 18-29 - 3% (of total electorate)
Latinos 30-44 - 4%
Latinos 45-64 - 4%
Latinos 65+ - 1%
That works out to about 4.2 million, 5.6 million, 5.6 million and 1.4 million respectively.
Finding info about citizens vs non-citizens isn’t as easy. But there are about 56 million latinos in the US.
According to this
26% of latinos are millennials, 22% are Gen X, 14% are boomers, 4% are silent/greatest.
So the share of the electorate that is millennials and Gen X is about the same as the boomers, despite making up a far larger % of the population. There are about 19 million latino millennials, but only 4 million showed up to vote in 2016. 12 million Gen X, and 5.6 million voted. By comparison 2.2 million silent/greatest but they made up 1.4 million voters.
21%, 46%, 71%, 62% voter turnout for latinos by age bracket (millennial, Gen X, boomer, silent/greatest)
These are all rough numbers.
Thank you for that.
From Pew:
49%, 63%, 69%, 70% voter turnout same age brackets overall.
And also from Pew:
Millennial only- overall, Hispanic, Black %s: 49; 40; 49.
So whatever technique Pew uses comes up with a different number than your calculation, but I think yours are still good for relative trending: within the Hispanic pool the largest cohort, the millennials, participate notably less than the older cohorts than in other demographic groups, and much less than overall or Black millennials.
My hypothesis is falsified. Shame that. 