“Overall, the turnout data show that the surface totals, like saying it was 42 percent turnout, belie the fact that turnout is so varied by age and demographics,” Paul Mitchell, vice-president of Political Data, Inc., told CalWatchdog.com.

A new turnout analysis published by Mitchell’s firm shows wide disparities in voter participation throughout the state based on region, age, ethnicity and past voter history. These demographic factors offer a more complete picture of the lowest turnout general election in California’s history.

So, who voted? Despite their smaller registration numbers, Republicans turned out in higher percentages than Democrats or independent voters. Older Californians showed up at the polls in greater numbers than younger voters. Bay Area counties outperformed Southern California. White and Asian Americans voted in higher numbers than Latinos or African Americans.

Dig a little deeper, and you can identify smaller sub-groups of voters that are a virtual lock to cast their ballots. For example, here’s a fun stat: 90 percent of Republican voters over the age of 65 in Sierra County exercised their franchise in last November’s election.

Age: Older voters show up, younger voters don’t

Before race or ethnicity, age offered the starkest contrast in turnout. Statewide, two-thirds of registered voters over the age of 65 cast their ballots.

“Look at any district and the Age 65-plus cohort had turnout that is about 25 points higher and parallels their turnout in other gubernatorial elections,” Mitchell explained. “In a place like Huntington Beach, you see that age cohort at 72 percent turnout. Even in a low-income community like Santa Ana, nearly two-thirds of those voters cast ballots.”

Younger voters, who rocked the vote for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, weren’t nearly as enthused about the reelection of California’s 76-year-old Democratic governor, Jerry Brown. Just 17 percent of registered voters under the age of 30 voted.

“I think even folks that work with the data all the time were surprised by just how low that number was,” Mindy Romero, director of the California Civic Engagement Project at the University of California, Davis, told KQED. “Youth get very little contact, real contact, from candidates and campaigns. And so it generates even less information, less awareness, less connection with the political process.”

34th State Senate: Lower Latino turnout

In the competitive 34th state Senate district, Republican Janet Nguyen cruised to victory with the help of Asian voters, who overwhelmingly voted by mail. In her battle against former Democratic Assemblyman Jose Solorio, 47 percent of Asian voters turned out for the hotly contested legislative race — 10 points higher than the statewide average for Asian Americans.

Higher turnout by Asian Americans coincided with lower turnout by the district’s more than 102,000 Latino voters. Although a quarter of the district’s registered voters are Latino, this group accounted for 20 percent of the voters in November, moving Latinos from the second largest ethnic group to third, after Asian Americans.

Asian American voters in the 34th State Senate race also had a big preference in how they voted. Among Asian voters that participated in the Orange County-based legislative race, 79 percent cast their ballots by mail, with the remaining 21 percent appearing at a polling place. No other group, based on age, ethnicity or party, came close to this 4-to-1 absentee voting ratio.

Asian American vote-by-mail preference

Although it was highest in the 34th State Senate district, Asian Americans throughout the state overwhelmingly preferred voting by mail, with 70 percent of them preferring that method to voting in person.

On the surface, this preference might seem trivial, a statistic to impress political consultants and data geeks. But it has major implications for the outcomes of races.

Absentee voters make up their minds earlier in the race, affecting how and when campaigns decide to roll out their messages and criticize their rivals. Voters who cast their ballots by mail also contend with a greater number of reasons for their vote to be invalidated, such as a mismatched signature or late-arriving ballot.

State lawmakers have tried to address the issue of late-arriving ballots by extending the deadline for receiving absentee ballots. As of Jan. 1, ballots that are postmarked on Election Day can be received up to three days later.

Online registration produces better turnout

Above all else, past voter history was the easiest way to predict whether you voted in November. Ninety percent of primary voters returned to the ballot box five months later.

Newly registered voters are less likely to vote than experienced voters. But California’s online voter registration program has helped boost turnout.

“If you look at the online registrants by age group and compare it to overall, you’ll find that 18-29 and 30-45 year old online registrants performed 8 points higher than their age groups overall,” Mitchell pointed out. “Asians in those age groups performed 5 points better, and Latinos 7-8 points better.”

Political Data Inc.’s complete voter registration analysis is available here.

“When it’s 50 % turnout, your voting power is doubled #math,” Paul Mitchell of Political Data Inc., the state’s top political data firm, tweeted on Election Day.

Increased voting power — it’s one of several upsides to the state’s record low turnout in this month’s gubernatorial election. With fewer than 75,000 ballots left to count statewide, turnout is expected to top out at 42 percent — the lowest for a general election in California’s history. Of the state’s 38 million residents, just 7.5 million registered voters cast their ballots. That comes out to one in five people deciding who will lead the largest state in the nation for the next four years.

California’s abyssal turnout rate demolished the previous record for worst turnout in a general election. In 2002, just 50.57 percent of registered voters chose between Republican businessman Bill Simon and then-Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat.

It wasn’t unexpected. The June 2014 primary turnout of 25.2 percent set a new record for the lowest voter turnout for any statewide election in California; the previous low was 28.2 percent in June 2008.

The low turnout has inspired a round of news stories about how to improve civic participation. “Democracy works better as more people participate,” incoming Secretary of State Alex Padilla told the San Francisco Chronicle. “Excitement around the particular candidates drives much of the turnout, and that’s hard to legislate.”

KFBK recently asked, “What should California do about low voter turnout?”

The question presupposes low turnout is a problem in need of fixing. For starters, California’s voter turnout isn’t evenly distributed throughout the state. In tiny Sierra County, the second-least populous county in the state, 73 percent of registered voters cast their ballots in the Nov. 4 election. That’s more than double Los Angeles, the most populous county in the country, where 31 percent of registered voters participated. Another half-dozen counties — Nevada, Mariposa, Amador, Alpine, Plumas and Marin — all had turnout of 60 percent or more.

2016: Bumper year for ballot measures

In addition to increased voting power for high-propensity voters, the state’s record-low turnout in 2014 will lead to a bumper year for ballot measures in 2016.

“If voters were a bit underwhelmed by the measures on the California ballot … just wait for the 2016 election,” wrote Joel Fox, publisher of Fox and Hounds Daily, one of the state’s top business and political websites. “Already there is talk of potential initiatives on legalizing recreational marijuana, public pension reform, minimum wage increases and a basket full of tax hikes. The machinations around the tax issues could be most compelling just because so many are being considered.”

A recent memo from a top-notch public affairs firm based in Sacramento made the case that 2016 could break records for the most number of ballot measures on a single ballot.

“The historically low turnout in the 2014 general election will dramatically lower the number of signatures required to qualify ballot initiatives in 2016,” wrote Rick Claussen, Ned Wigglesworth and Aaron McLear of Redwood Pacific Public Affairs. “But the lower signature threshold and extended collection window very likely will make qualifying initiatives far less expensive than ever before, potentially producing a very long ballot in 2016.”

The threshold for qualifying a ballot measure is based on participation in the previous gubernatorial election. Initiative statutes require valid signatures from at least 5 percent of the total votes cast for governor at the last gubernatorial election, while initiative constitutional amendments require at least 8 percent. Based on current figures, that would lower the signature requirement from 504,760 valid signatures to 365,000.

In other words, just 2 percent of registered voters can get a measure on the ballot — or less than 1 percent of residents in the state.

As CalWatchdog.com’s Chris Reed argued, “That is good news for those considering taking on public employee unions in 2016 with ballot measures putting limits on government pensions or scrapping state laws allowing teachers to receive lifetime tenure after less than two years on the job.”

The Marijuana Policy Project, which is pushing for the legalization of marijuana throughout the country, is optimistic about California in 2016.

“This year’s election was a large step forward, but the 2016 election will be a huge leap toward ending marijuana prohibition in this country once and for all,” Rob Kampia, the organization’s executive director, said in a statement after the election.

Redwood Pacific’s memo outlined other changes to the initiative process that will alter the 2016 political landscape. Under a law passed in 2011, all ballot measures arising from signatures are considered on the general election ballot. Additionally, in 2014, the legislature approved Senate Bill 1253, which will extend the signature gathering period by an extra month, add a public review period for title and summary, and require a legislative informational hearing when proponents collect 25 percent of the necessary signatures.

“For a relatively small investment, a proponent can force a legislative hearing on their initiative,” McLear told CalWatchdog.com.

The low threshold won’t last forever. As KQED’s John Myers recently pointed out, “The new low bar for initiatives will last only for two election cycles.”

Probolsky Research: “Surprises may be the norm”

It’s no coincidence that California’s record-low turnout was matched by a record number of legislative upsets. An incumbent Democratic state lawmaker hadn’t lost reelection in 20 years. This year, four incumbents lost reelection, including Assemblyman Raul Bocanegra’s shocking defeat to long-shot Democrat Patty Lopez.

One of California’s top polling firms expects more upsets, courtesy of low turnout and the Top Two elections system.

“Surprises may be the norm,” said Justin Wallin, COO/CMO of Probolsky Research. “Voter behavior is more likely to mimic what we have seen with our jungle primaries, wherein candidates in large fields of contestants can’t rely so heavily on their ballot language.”

Wallin believes candidates need to “ensure that voters arrive at the ballot box intending to vote for them, otherwise they are likely to just get lost in the crowd.”