The announcement of the winner?in last week’s?Democratic gubernatorial primary sounded more like an answer in?Jeopardy! — it came?in?the form of a question.
Who is Robert Gray?
Not a single one of the 147,043 people who voted for Mr. Gray knew who he was when they went to the polls. That?s no exaggeration: he made no effort to?campaign, and?he said he forgot to?vote for himself. Even his mother thought she was voting for a different Robert Gray.
His opponents Vicki Slater and Valerie Short — legitimate candidates who actively sought the nomination — didn?t know either. They never crossed paths with Gray on the campaign trail. He didn?t spend a single dollar on his candidacy. He didn’t even have a Facebook page.?
[mks_toggle title=”Civics 101: A?Mississippi Election Primer” state=”close “]
Mississippi elects each of its executive and legislative officials in the odd year prior to the presidential election. That includes eight statewide offices, three regional public service and transportation commissioners, 52 senators, and 122 members of the House.
A number of local elections are planned according to the state election calendar. They include — but are not limited to — sheriff, district attorney, chancery clerk, county supervisor, coroner, and in certain places, school district superintendent. Every one of these local races allows for party affiliation.
Party primaries occur on the first Tuesday in August, and the general election is held on the first Tuesday in November.
Mississippi has no official party registration, so voters have the option of choosing either party?s primary. But choosing a party primary means voting on the entire slate — you can?t vote in the GOP primary for governor and then the Democratic primary for county supervisor.
[/mks_toggle]
In the days since the election, the questions?have?shifted from who to how.?And while no explanation is definitive, Gray almost certainly?benefited from?an uncommon confluence of factors.
The two active?gubernatorial candidates had never run for elected office before, so neither?possessed?high name recognition or a pre-existing constituency.?Slater and Short raised?more money than Gray’s $0, but neither came close to what successful?Democratic?candidates have spent?in past?primaries. In the end, his opponents’?relative anonymity allowed?Gray to capitalize, inadvertently, on his one major?advantage: he was running against two women in the only state that has never?elected a female governor or member of Congress. Without anything else to distinguish among them, more than half of primary?voters opted for the man.
(In my opinion, too much credit has been given to Gray’s name appearing first on the ballot: Tim Johnson, the Democratic establishment’s preferred candidate for lieutenant governor, was listed second on the ballot. He prevailed easily over his male opponent despite spending?less money than Slater.)
No matter whether you buy that explanation, I believe that?the?unique circumstances?of Gray?s anomaly are less important?than?the?conditions that?made such a result possible in the first place.?In other words, our question?should change?from,?”Why did 51 percent of Democratic voters mark Robert Gray on?August 4?”?to,?”Why did a majority of Democratic primary voters go?to the polls unprepared to vote for the state?s top office?”
As I’ll explain down the page, the conditions that enabled?Gray’s victory are deeply embedded in Mississippi?s anachronistic election process, a system?designed for one-party white supremacist rule that?has not kept pace with the expansion of voting rights or partisan realignment. As a result, the 21st century Democratic primary electorate?is distorted?through?19th century laws and traditions. Problems occur when these three?vestiges?of the old regime work in concert:
- Candidates for every state and local office can declare a partisan affiliation, but voters can not register with a party. Any voter can participate in either the Democratic or Republican primary.
- Many local officials and their challengers still run as Democrats without GOP opposition. Even in many majority-Republican counties, the Democratic primary operates as the de facto general election for certain local offices.
- Local races (of which there are many) drive turnout even when state offices are contested. The Democratic primary attracts more voters than the Republican primary despite GOP dominance in statewide elections. A large share of the Democratic primary voters do not support the Democratic nominees in the general election.
The?roots of this system begin — as so many things do in Mississippi — in the era following?the Civil War.
The White Primary
During Reconstruction, the?15th Amendment was added to the Constitution in order to prevent?states from denying the right to vote based on ?race, color, or previous condition of servitude.?
When white ex-Confederates regained control of Mississippi’s government in the late 19th century, they?refused to accept the new suffrage guarantee. Instead, they exploited?a loophole: the Constitution says?states?cannot prevent black voters from participating in elections — it didn’t say anything about political parties. They argued that primary elections were votes among the “private” party membership.?Therefore political parties could legally exclude African American voters from their?primaries.?
In 1902, Mississippi adopted a law officially sanctioning a whites-only primary system. Nearly every state and local office — from governor down to county coroner — allowed candidates to declare a?partisan affiliation. They all ran as?Democrats. With?no opposition, the Democratic primary became the de facto general election. This voided the political power of the few black voters who were able to register in spite of poll taxes, literacy tests, and physical?threats.
Mississippi?s whites-only?primary came to an end after the integrated Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party secured the national party?s support through direct action at the 1964 Democratic National Convention. The Voting Rights Act, passed the next year, finally enforced the 15th Amendment in the South. By 1968, Mississippi had the highest share of black voters in the country. Almost all became Democrats.
Soon thereafter, whites began voting en masse for?the Republican Party in statewide?elections. Mississippi last supported a Democratic presidential nominee in?1976, and no Democratic candidate for governor has won a majority of the popular vote since?1987. (Ronnie Musgrove, in 1999, fell short of 50 percent and was ultimately elected by the House of Representatives.) Today, the GOP controls seven of eight statewide offices, both?U.S. Senate seats, three of four Congressional seats, and both chambers of the Legislature.?
However, the partisan realignment has not filtered all the way down the ballot. Many local officials?still run as Democrats out of tradition if not ideology. In a large number of?races, all?of the challengers run as Democrats, too, so if you want to have a say in local affairs, you must vote in the?Democratic primary — even if you plan to vote for the Republican slate in November.
This effect has waned in recent years as local offices in suburban GOP strongholds such as?DeSoto, Madison, and Rankin counties have gone red. But?in many?counties,?the Democratic primary remains the only show in town.?
Which brings us to what happened last Tuesday.
The Purple?Primary
Elections are all about turnout, and in?Mississippi, most?turnout is local. Despite the GOP?s popular?majority and hotly-contested races for state auditor and treasurer, the Republican primary still had 15,000 fewer voters than the Democratic primary.
Of the?562,794 voters who showed up, 288,686 (51 percent) chose the Democratic table. That’s actually a considerable decline in the?Democratic advantage from previous?primaries, but primary turnout has no?predictive power for the general election.?The?Democrats’ gubernatorial nominees in 2007 and 2011?finished with?42 and 39 percent of the vote, respectively.
In both elections, the Democratic nominees received fewer total votes in November than the aggregate?cast for Democratic candidates in the primaries.
| Primary | General | Difference | ||
| 2011 | Democratic | 412,530 | 348,617 | -18% |
| Republican | 289,788 | 544,851 | 88% | |
| Total | 702,318 | 893,468 | 27% | |
| 2007 | Democratic | 446,722 | 313,232 | -30% |
| Republican | 197,647 | 430,807 | 118% | |
| Total | 644,369 | 744,039 | 15% |
The Democratic turnout advantage?is only present when local races are on the ballot. In federal races, Democratic primary turnout drops precipitously.
Here is a graph of the party turnout during the past four major statewide primaries: the state/local races?in 2011 and 2015 and the federal races in 2012 and 2014. I’ve included the vote total for the top statewide office in each of those elections.
Democratic turnout in the 2015?state/local?primary?was?more than three times as large as in the 2014 and 2012 federal primaries. The 85,000 Democratic faithful who showed up to vote in those low-key House and Senate primaries offer a minimum approximation?of how many loyal Democrats would show up to vote if?only?statewide offices were on the ballot. Under even the most conservative estimates, it’s likely that a majority of Democratic primary voters turned out because of the bottom?of the ticket rather than the top.
On the other hand, you’ll?notice that Republican turnout has been?consistent across state/local and federal primaries. The Republicans have had competitive races in each of those?years, but it’s clear?that GOP diehards?turn out for every primary, rain or shine, without much?crossover voting to the Democratic primary. (This mainly serves to dispel the conspiracy theory that Gov. Bryant’s Republican loyalists plotted to vote for the weakest Democratic candidate.)
The relative turnout figures suggest that?most of the elasticity in the?Democratic primary comes from?loosely-attached Republicans and independents?who cross over to vote in local races. While the effect of crossover voting is declining on a statewide level, it is still prevalent in many counties: the Democratic primary received at least 75 percent of the voters in 47?of Mississippi’s 82 counties. Of those 47 counties, only 20 voted for the Democratic gubernatorial nominee in 2011.
Three-fifths of?counties had more than a 25 percentage point gap between the Democratic share of the primary and general election vote. Those counties accounted for 68 percent of the total Democratic primary turnout in 2015 — but only 39 percent of the?Democratic nominee’s votes in 2011.
The size of the dropoff between August and November can be staggering.?Nearly 90 percent of Tippah County voters participated in the Democratic primary, but only 25 percent cast their ballot for the Democratic nominee in 2011. Ninety-two percent voted in?Carroll County’s Democratic primary, but only 29 percent went blue in 2011. In total, 17?counties (21 percent) have at least a 50-point gap between Democratic share of the primary and general election vote.
Explore the map for yourself. The counties shaded in blue vote more Democratic in August?than November. Red counties vote more Republican.
The Gray Primary
So what does all of this?have to do with Robert Gray? Well, plenty.
It is logical to assume — a dangerous thing to do with?politics, I’ll admit — that most?voters who choose to cast?a ballot for a mystery candidate have?little or?no familiarity with anyone who is?running. Since Democratic base voters?are more likely to follow the party’s candidates and receive?contact from their campaigns, a majority of the?loyalists probably voted for Slater or Short. Conversely, those?who were?least engaged with the Democratic campaigns — specifically, the independents or loose Republicans who crossed over to vote in their local races — likely?voted in greater?numbers for Gray. (Note: I’m merely?talking about probabilities here; many?loyal Democrats voted for Gray, and many?crossover voters did not.)
If that assumption is correct, we’d expect Gray to?average larger?majorities?in the?counties with the widest voting disparities?between Democratic primary and general election, and we’d expect him to fall short in areas with more proportional turnout.
That’s exactly what happened.
Gray won an outright majority in 44 of the 50 counties (88 percent) in which the Democratic share of the primary vote?was at least 25 percentage points greater than the 2011 general election vote share. He received?55 percent of the total vote in these?high-crossover counties. They accounted for 71 percent of his primary votes, but — as I mentioned in the previous section — only 39 percent of the Democratic general election votes.
Gray?only carried a majority?in?10 of the 32 counties (30 percent) where?turnout was?more proportional. He won?39 percent of the total vote in these low-crossover counties, which produced the remaining 61 percent of the Democrats’ 2011 general election votes.
A linear regression analysis confirms a statistically significant correlation between a county’s crossover voting and Gray’s level of?support: Gray’s margin of victory over his opponents’ combined total grew by one percentage point for every five points that the 2015 Democratic primary turnout exceeded the 2011 general election vote. The rate of crossover voting accounted for 40 percent of the variance in Gray’s county-to-county performance.
In effect, the?crossover voters diluted the preference of the voters who will support the party’s nominee in?November.
This isn’t to?say that loyal Democrats didn’t also succumb to uninformed voting. Surely many?did. Gray?still racked up nearly 40 percent of the vote in low-crossover counties — more than enough to get into a runoff against one of his opponents. The?state Democratic Party organization (or lack thereof)?bears?responsibility for that. No?established candidate was willing to run for the state’s top office, and little financial or messaging support was available for the candidates who jumped in.
But even in the Democrats’ atrophied condition, it?would have been almost impossible for Gray?or any unknown?candidate to have won a majority of the vote without?the systemic distortion and dilution of the electorate?created by Mississippi’s antiquated primary laws and traditions.
Featured photo courtesy of Robert Gray for Governor Facebook page.?
What a bunch of bulls***! The Democrat voters were ignorant, pure and simple. And that was no surprise.
Wow. Great article. Articles like these are why I keep coming back. Your economic background always makes for an interesting read.
So wait, what’s the problems with Missisippi’s old traditions and way of doing things? I find them admirable and personally wish that the rest of the country could go back to the old 19th century way of doing things. We’d be a lot better off socially and financially, with a much more well-developed population.
Democrat party is the party of imbeciles. “Reform” means making sure the imbecile vote is more easily directed to what we want.
Sooo… ignorant democrat voters are not turning out to vote? What’s the problem? Democracy is a terrible idea in and of itself. The only way it can possibly work is when low-information, ignorant voters are not voting.
Definitely a great article. If the other commenters read the article, ignorant Democrat voters are not the cause of the outcome, but rather uninformed Republican and Independent voters crossing over are. And to those who wish to point out that Democrats are imbeciles, you have some explaining to do starting with why Republicans control the state of Mississippi and yet our state government is the biggest welfare recipient in the country. For every $1 we pay in federal taxes we get $3.07 back in federal dollars to our state coffers, more than any other state in the country. Looks like our Republican state officials are all on federal welfare. Our state would die a quick death without our welfare money since a full 46% (nearly half!) of our entire state budget is propped up by Washington DC money (again comprising a bigger percentage than any other state). And even though we have all that federal welfare, we are still taxing each taxpayer in Mississippi more per person than 15 other states in the country! It doesn’t appear that the Republicans running this state are exactly geniuses, I am sorry to say. (Source WSJ and many others)
gop rules!
We agree. They rule the overtaxed dependent welfare state we live in, true. And they are doing absolutely nothing to change it, either.
Well they should. Welfare should be ended, and we should have Flat Tax, so all Pay at the same RATE.
Excuse me but how is the state going to survive when our freeloading state stops getting half its budget from Washington DC? Are you going to be fine with the roads where you live never having maintenance again and your local schools all closing?
Oh wait. I get it. You’re actually just a libtard, railing against a conservative state. Why didn’t u just Say so to start with? The state should do more with less, and maintain the roads at A Lower Cost. If they need More Revenue, have A Flat State Income Tax, (as many do), or increase their Sales Tax. But everyone should Pay at the same rate and these issues should be dealt with at the state level.
I live here Jack. Near Laurel. Voted for Bush twice. Calling me names (particularly when you don’t know me) seems like a tactic to not answer the questions I posed and is also rude. Are you always this rude to strangers? People aren’t this rude in my part of MS. The Jackson state government is all on welfare. They have their hand out to DC for freebies and aren’t doing a thing to change it. Worse than any other state. They are also trying to do less alright. Are you claiming road construction is overpaid? Where is your evidence? I hardly think it is done as frequently as necessary. Schools that need more funding are going to necessarily cause city and property taxes increases because of budget cuts. Is this what you want? I don’t. Until policies are implemented that will create more help-wanted signs for jobs that pay well we will stay remain a state whose government is addicted to welfare.
Simple. States should fend for themselves. I live in ND. We have a booming economy. Many ND’ans want to receive Farm Subsidies. I dont believe in that. Let everything succeed or fail in a free market. If states want or need to do road construction, let them figure it out on their own. I think the federal government should have extremely limited powers…apologies for any rude language, my bad.
I appreciate the apology. Jack I lived in Minnesota for many years. Been to ND countless times. Sister lived in ND for years. It’s apples and oranges compared to here in MS. Have you lived here? Driven on the roads here for years? Seen the shape the schools are in? If you haven’t you truly don’t understand. You don’t know what you’ve got til its gone. I’m all for a free market. The Republicans here have proven to me that if you don’t know how to create an economy where good paying jobs are plentiful you may as well pack it in and go do something else for a living, and let public servants who understand these things take charge like they do in Minnesota. MN as you well know has one of the best economies in the whole country.
Well, if u look at NE, ND, SD, TX (all GOP run states), they all have low Unemployment rates, and great economies. Im sure there are examples on both sides.
The Bakken Shale and oil and gas industry boom in Texas (and Wyoming) account for good economics alright but that is far more a function of geography than politics. Conservatives overall have never thought much of Rick Perry as evidence. He can never make traction as a Presidential candidate. He simply is not the brightest guy and certainly not the reason the state has done well. SD and NE are lower-half states on overall economy. Utah is probably the best example of Republican politics working well to put a state in good economic shape. However there are easily ten states doing better than Utah where Republicans do not outnumber Democrats.
Honestly, I dont care about Dem., or Rep.. I just bought it up because u did. I have lived in NY, I now live in ND. Regardless. I always vote Pro-Life, GOP, and I am against gays in any way shape or form. I believe in less Taxes, less Spending, Strong Military, And gun rights. I’m basically a “Sean or Rush” type. Doesn’t matter what state I’m in. I’m for Huckabee, Santorum, or Carson now. Take care!
I’m sorry but saying “GOP rules” in your original comment and then saying you aren’t talking Dem or Rep doesn’t make much sense to me. You make my point well. Every Republican representative in my state (and many, many Democrats too I might add) is pro-life, against homosexual rights, strong defenders of gun rights, for lowering taxes and (they say) they are for less spending (depends on what it is in my years of observation). Fine. But here’s the huge glaring problem: They don’t understand how to improve the economy, are totally dependent on welfare sent from DC to our state government to survive, and aren’t doing anything about it to change it- and likely don’t know how (or care as I’ve already mentioned). That’s reality. You take care too!
I think we should do what Ron Paul suggested (on domestic issues). Cut all government programs. Lowe Taxes to a flat rate. Return to A Gold Standard, stop printing Loot. And let people fend for themselves on a free market. Survival of the fittest. End all government welfare, corporate welfare, any welfare. DC should stop sending “welfare” to any state.
Cut all government programs… Well public schools and universities are government programs and have educated tens of millions. Many hospitals are government programs and have saved the lives of millions. Police and fire are government programs and save the lives of countless millions. Center for Disease Control is a government program and has stopped and prevented millions of death by pandemics here and worldwide. The FCC oversees a complex organization of radio frequencies and has done an excellent job so that you don’t try to make a cell phone call or use your computer and down an airliner traveling overhead. The FDIC is a government program that eliminated bank runs from happening (which used to occur every 20 years) and people losing all the money in their bank. The VA and GI Bill are government programs that help veterans get healthcare and an education since they put their life on the line for our country. The national parks is a government program that has preserved 83 million acres of beautiful and valuable scenic acreage. The courts are a government program that among many other things enforces business contracts at multiple levels including federal or you couldn’t have a free market at all. The Securities and Exchange Commission is a government program that polices Wall Street so that stock profits are made legally and not through scams. The Interstate system is a massive government program which all private businesses have an extreme reliance on. And lastly the U.S. Armed Forces are a government program- the biggest one of them all (we spend more than the next 8 countries total combined on our military). Which of these government programs do you want to cut? I’m all ears. But, I can promise you it won’t be a good idea.
We dont need public Universities. U want to go? U Pay. I never went to college, and Im doing just fine. So that’s gone. Remove government hospitals…i dont wanna Pay for that. We need cops, so they can stay. FCC should be privatized. FDIC should also be private. As for SEC, i dont care how people make Profits, as long as they play the game. I’ve run scams too. Google “Manufactured Spending”..that’s my career now. Interstate highways are there. Don’t need the fed’s involvement there. Medicare, and SS should be private. Eliminate Obamacare. Food Stamps, welfare should be removed too. Highways can be privatized, and so can jails. Both have been done. As minimal government as possible, and what little is necessary, should be at the state/local levels, and not by the feds. I’m further to the right on this stuff than Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.
Good luck with that. Rand Paul has 2% support AMONG REPUBLICANS for a reason. In the general population you’ve got less than 1% with you. Take care Jack. Thanks for the dialogue.
Ya, I disagree with Rand on foreign policy issues. That’s why he isn’t that popular. He’s also for legalization, etc., which most conservatives are not for. Take care.
It was all part of my evil genius plan. Mississippi for Medical Cannabis campaigned against dr. Short and Viki. Dr. Short campaigned as a ?#?Bi48?
hater. saying she wanted big Pharma to have control of Cannabis. Viki
avoided every attempt to come out in favor or against #Bi48 .Viki
thought she could run a campaign like Hillary was doing and win. LOL So i
had my retired fire fighter friend Robert Gray run for Governor of MS
and told him not to campaign and all the Viki and Short haters will vote
for him as the alternative. my plan worked. thank you!!!!