Notes¶
A Tale of Two States¶
To see the effects of participation, consider the following stories:
- Missouri: Decline of Democratic Party Participation
- Kansas: Intra-Party Realignment (1980s to mid‑2010s)
Key Similarities¶
| Dynamic | Kansas | Missouri |
|---|---|---|
| Initial Party Weakness | Limited competition between factions | Limited candidate recruitment infrastructure |
| Key Entry Point | Low-turnout primaries | Filing period management; uncontested filings |
| Strategy | Early organization; fill leadership roles | Recruit placeholder candidates to maintain control |
| Voter Engagement | Small, highly organized groups | Limited public participation |
| Long‑Term Outcome | Party reorganization with periodic shifts | Reduced competitive balance in many districts |
Lessons Learned¶
Low participation combined with high organization can allow small groups to control party structures.
When civic participation drops, decisions may increasingly be made by smaller, highly organized groups rather than broad majorities.
Some See Lower Participation¶
- Tennessee: primary turnout of ~17% in August 2022 reflects persistently low engagement
Source - Oklahoma: Primary runoffs turnout declining Source
- Alabama: had ~38% turnout in 2022 midterms, many rural races uncontested
Source - Texas: Over a quarter of Texas counties have no Democratic Party Chair. Source
- Michigan: GOP outpaced Democratic turnout in many rural counties
Source
Some See Increased Participation¶
- Minnesota: A social welfare group created by the faith-based coalition ISAIAH, brought an estimated 5,000 new caucus attendees to diverse communities throughout Minnesota Source