Two other factors that may be of relevance:
1. Buchanan drew 8,000 votes in Palm Beach County in
the 1996 Republican primary, which was his best
showing of any county in the state.
2. The Reform Party has seen its membership grow 110
percent in Palm Beach County since 1996, while most
counties in Florida stayed relatively flat or
declined.
The primary reason for this latter statistic, one
might infer, is the presence of Palm Beach resident
Donald Trump, who had been Buchanan's chief rival for
the Reform nomination going into the year. While there
may be little overlap in support between Buchanan
supporters and Trump supporters, it is not
unfathomable that some segment of Trump's base in the
Reform Party would still vote Buchanan simply out of a
desire to keep their flailing party afloat.
Having lived in Palm Beach County for most of the last
year (and having been managing editor of the Palm
Beach Jewish News, the publication which served that
segment of the local populace which is most
anti-Buchanan) I understand and agree with the
perception that Buchanan's returns there were a
statistical aberration. I don't know that the county's
voting record or demographics necessarily bear that
out.
In a year when only six Libertarian Party members
earned public office nationwide, Palm Beach County
elected TWO, both to the Soil and Conservation
Commission. Isn't that a bigger statistical anomoly
than Buchanan's votes?
--- William Dickens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It isn't just that Palm beach is large. Palm Beach
> had an enormous number of Buchanan votes even for
> its size and particularly when you take into account
> that places that voted more heavily democratic also
> tended to be less likely to vote for Buchanan. See
> the attached.
>
>
> ATTACHMENT part 2 application/msword
> ATTACHMENT part 3 application/msword
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/
