> So the bottom line is I don't buy it. Expanding the electorate would
change
> voting patterns, and mostly in the progressive direction.
>
I do not think so - I have not seen any convincing evidence that nonvoters AS AWHOLE are much different than the voting population. If anything, they tend to have a lower socio-economic status which is often associated with social conservatism.
What makes a difference in including the nonvoters is the so-called "cherry-picking" or selective mobilization of that part of the nonvoting population that is likely to support a particular party, but discouraging the participation of other non-voters. That can sway an election or two.
Regarding your comment about the detachment of the nonvoters from the political process - that holds for the majority of voters as well. People vote for ritualistic reasons, because they identify with a celebrity figure (e.g. Schwartzenegger) or to vicariously "kick ass" of their favorite scapegoat group (ethnic minorities, foreigners, northern liberals, gays, "liberated" women, etc.) - but have nearly zero understanding of most "policy issues." Most of them do not even know who their elected representative is or what is his/her voting records.
Wojtek