Wednesday, February 04, 2009

quick and dirty

The maps fwiw. The results for the special election for City Council District 2 are as follows. I should have added neighborhood boundaries. For reference you can look at the city's neighborhood map for the district. A tiny bit of commentary below:

Percentage Smith

Percentage Blotzer

Percentage Schubert

Percentage Metz

First off, it was a special election and as these things go you never get high turnout. The turnout here may have been low, but it rarely is much higher for an off cycle one-off election. I will tell you I know folks who could have voted in this election yesterday, people who wouldn't have missed the general election last fall (or in any presidential cycle) under any circumstances yet who didn't even know there was an election yesterday.
2nd... I have no comment on any of these candidates themselves, but there is something in these results that can apply to an awful lot of campaigns. Blotzer seemed to have a lot of support on the web. News accounts say she did well at fundraising and had some notable endorsement. Just under 25% may seem like a decent result given the general advantage given to the endorsed Democrat in an election like this.... but it was a very concentrated support. Look at the detail results and one thing stand out. More than 30% of all the votes Blotzer received came from a single district.... literally one of 41 precincts in the council district. Ward 19 District 28 gave Blotzer 194 of her 639 votes which is kind of remarkable in that it was 85% support in that one distict. I can only presume she lives right there. I don't doubt the results in this case, but when you see anomalous results like that in a single district you often have to wonder if there is not some error.
Clearly a lot of support from her neighbors and friends, but you see this a lot. Politicians or potential pols who have a core group supporting them, but not much beyond that core support. Consider the coincidence that if you take out that one district then Blotzer and Schubert tied exactly with 445 votes which would notionally be under 19% each. So the money and the endorsements and all the internet buzz really didn't generate any many more votes than what Schubert got without any of that, nor the endorsement.


Blogger Lady Elaine said...

Huge kudos on the map--I've been looking all morning on a good district breakdown!

What ward is that (28/19)?

The things I saw in the results are two fold:

One--67% voted straight democratic
Two--If Blotzer would have worked harder to take Schubert out of the race and made it a two person race against her and Smith, she would have closed the gap significantly.

I really think Schubert was only in it for one reason . . . to keep Blotzer's numbers down. He was the mayor's boy, no denying, to screw with her and to help Smith win the race. He will be rewarded in the end. Wait and see what promotion he will receive in his zoning job.

Wednesday, February 04, 2009 11:43:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since the district is primarilty democrat and only one democrat was in the race, why does that shock you? I felt that the majority of votes that Schubert got would have gone to Smith,(same homegrown candidate appeal) with the exception of that one district that he came close to a tie with Blotzer. Just an opinion but I am sure we will see a rematch in the primary.

Wednesday, February 04, 2009 11:57:00 AM  
Blogger C. Briem said...

Just to avoid confusion, it was 67% of the people who pulled a straight party ticket that did so for “Democrat”. But it was only 528 people (about 20%) of the folks who voted voted that way. So 288 votes out of 2609 pulled the “D” lever vice voting for an individual. So around 11% of the total votes cast. Given that you have to figure those are probably the same voters who are likely to vote as directed via a slate card I am not sure the impact here was very much. I have shown the impact of straight party voting in the city in past posts, but when I have done that I usually calculate the impact of straight party voting on total votes cast.. not the percentage just within the universe of folks pulling the party levers. Not sure that tells you much, especially in a special election like this.

Wednesday, February 04, 2009 1:07:00 PM  
Blogger Bram Reichbaum said...

As far as "the Internet buzz" ... that buzz for Georgia only lasted about two weeks. Hypothetically, if she chooses to contest in the primary (and if Coucilwoman Smith doesn't win over the intertubes in the meanwhile) that Internet buzz will be actively engaging over a period of four months -- which I think surpasses the threshold for it to have an effect on the real world.

Wednesday, February 04, 2009 2:58:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I really think Schubert was only in it for one reason . . . to keep Blotzer's numbers down."

That's not the case at all and you can take that to the bank.

Wednesday, February 04, 2009 5:48:00 PM  
Blogger Bram Reichbaum said...

"I really think Schubert was only in it for one reason . . . to keep Blotzer's numbers down."

Didn't seem to the case at the post-election party. Brendan seemed every bit the reserved but distraught 3rd place finisher. He did wander over to the numbers on screen and point, and ask, "10% turnout. Do you call that representative?"

Wednesday, February 04, 2009 6:18:00 PM  
Blogger Bram Reichbaum said...

Can I put in a request? An overlay of the DeSantis vote and the Blotzer vote? My instinct is they'd look similar, with Blotzer doing about 1.5x as well over DeSantis.

Wednesday, February 04, 2009 8:23:00 PM  
Blogger C. Briem said...

am not quite sure what kind of overlay would make much sense. But if you want the overall numbers: looks to me that LR won 63.8% of votes in District 2, MD had 34.8%. But again, given the totality of the circumstances I am not sure there is much to infer from the comparison. The MD % came in nearly identical to the % for Mccain within the district fwiw.

Wednesday, February 04, 2009 8:42:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home