Right? Can you see a correlation on that graph? Oregon is a turqoisie color. I don;t know when you were there.
Also, there was a curious bump in all the states in 1992, When Clinton was elected. All the states, that is, except Texas.
So, the turnout graph is a Wikipedia source, but remarkably detailed. Something to make one go Hmmm. Of course it is slightly OT, because that is voter turnout, which is obviously being juiced in parts.
However, OP was about registration. Well, it is definitely impossible to even get 100%, let alone more than that. Audit all 35 states that claim that.
Oregon was moving and shaking in the centre of the pack, but obviously participated in the curious spike in 1992 - Bill Clinton - prolly a lot of cheatin' gwan.
Then in 2004, Oregon suddenly jumped into the rarified atmosphere of extreme participation. That one elected Dubya for a second term. Miraculous.
When I was in Oregon, the turn out and registration were generally about 30-50%.
Right? Can you see a correlation on that graph? Oregon is a turqoisie color. I don;t know when you were there.
Also, there was a curious bump in all the states in 1992, When Clinton was elected. All the states, that is, except Texas.
So, the turnout graph is a Wikipedia source, but remarkably detailed. Something to make one go Hmmm. Of course it is slightly OT, because that is voter turnout, which is obviously being juiced in parts.
However, OP was about registration. Well, it is definitely impossible to even get 100%, let alone more than that. Audit all 35 states that claim that.
I was there during 80 to 2000. Moved to WA after 2000.
Oregon was moving and shaking in the centre of the pack, but obviously participated in the curious spike in 1992 - Bill Clinton - prolly a lot of cheatin' gwan.
Then in 2004, Oregon suddenly jumped into the rarified atmosphere of extreme participation. That one elected Dubya for a second term. Miraculous.
Cheating after mail-in voting. Before mail-in voting, it was really good.