Aki Soga

Free Press Engagement and Insights Editor

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton partisans are parsing the results of Saturday's Nevada caucus to bolster their respective candidate's narratives, but the numbers that should concern all Democrats is voter turnout.

Clinton scored a victory over Sanders -- decisive or narrow, depending on which camp you listen to -- in Nevada, but fewer Democrats cast votes in the contest than in 2008. That repeats a pattern seen in Iowa and New Hampshire, a sign that something about the race is failing to ignite party members.

The Nevada caucuses attracted about 80,000 voters on Saturday, down sharply from nearly 120,000 in 2008, when Clinton faced off against a field that included another upstart named Barack Obama.

In the New Hampshire primary on Feb. 9, the turnout was better -- and Sanders won big: 250,974 total votes, but still more than 30,000 votes less than in 2008 which set a record.

And in Iowa on Feb. 1, 171,000 Democrats cast votes in the first-in-the-nation caucuses compared to 220,000 in 2008.

By comparison, Republicans saw record turnout in their first three contests, Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. Those numbers say the primary race that's energizing party members is clearly on the GOP’s side.

Sanders blamed turnout for falling short in Nevada, a troubling admission for a candidate who has long said that engaging a large number of new voters is the key to his political revolution. But the overall Democratic turnout for the early races should concern anyone in the party who has at least one eyed trained on the November election.