Monday, April 30, 2007

It was a Turn-Out Election

Ald. Stone was right to credit Mike Noonan and the Daley forces for his victory. As Dick Vitale would say, It Was All About Turnout, Baby!

The 50th Ward had a net increase in registered voters (24,709 > 25,287) as well as people who voted in the April 17th election (10,489 > 11,269). The additional 780 people who voted in the April runoff increased turnout from 42.5% to 45%. But what is interesting is where this increase in turnout came.

Of the 24 precincts that gained in turnout above the ward average, all but 6 (Precincts 15, 42, 35, 13, 4 and 7) of them gave Ald. Stone a majority of their votes. The top 12 precincts that gained in turnout all went to Stone, and the top 3 (45, 39 amd 40) each voted more the 73% for Stone. These 18 precincts gave Stone an additional 564 (out of his gain of 896) over what he got out of them in February.


Red: Turnout > 65% (4): 38, 12, 16, 14
Dark Green: Turnout 55-64% (10): 1, 3, 31, 27, 41, 15, 45, 11, 5, 40
Light Green: Turnout 45-54% (12): 30, 7, 42, 21, 36, 2, 39, 25, 18, 44, 35, 10
Light Blue: Turnout 35-44% (12): 4, 19, 37, 20, 6, 9, 33, 28, 29, 34, 23, 43
Yellow: Turnout 25-34% (7): 13, 17, 26, 22, 8, 24, 32

The difference between the Stone campaign's to turnout voters and Dolar's is clear. Outside of Precinct 15, all of the dark hues are west of California, in Stone precincts. This is why Stone won. Stone had a much better Election Day than Dolar. Given the charges that Dolar supporters are making, it appears that Stone was much better prepared, as well.

In contrast, Dolar only got 86 (out of 432) additional votes out of the six precincts that gained in turnout above the ward average. This column combined the votes that Dolar received in February with those of Greg Brewer, who endorsed Dolar in the run-off, which was then subtracted from the April numbers. The working assumption is that a vote for Brewer was also a vote against Stone and thus would transfer to Dolar (if they came out to vote).

Despite gaining 432 more votes than the two received in February, Dolar still suffered a net decline in some precincts. Nine precincts, all but two west of California, gave Dolar fewer votes than she and Brewer combined received in February. Another three, only one west of California, gave Dolar no net increase but exactly what the two of them combined did in February.


Blue: Dolar Decline in April Vote over Feb Dolar+Brewer votes
Green: No Increase in Dolar Vote in April over Feb Dolar+Brewer votes

Finally, seven precincts, all but two east of California, showed actual declines in voter turnout in April. While the rest of the ward was showing up in greater numbers, these precincts (6, 34, 17, 24, 21, 37, 32) had fewer voters turn out.


What we see here is that the SEIU poll correctly predicted that some Brewer voters would not vote for Naisy Dolar. For whatever reason, some voters who were drawn to Greg Brewer could not come out and vote for Dolar. That same poll also predicted that Dolar's voters would turn out for Brewer, which is why SEIU tried to convince Dolar to drop out of the race. The April results seem to support SEIU here.

Labels: , , , ,

39 Comments:

At April 30, 2007 9:22 AM, Blogger Hugh said...

> Of the 24 precincts that gained in turnout above the ward average

What does this mean?

Did you mean to write "of the 24 precincts that gained in turnout from Feb to April"?

 
At April 30, 2007 9:27 AM, Blogger Hugh said...

> The working assumption is that a vote for Brewer ... would transfer to Dolar

The 2nd 1/2 of your post is based on this assumption. This is a very weak assumption. What is your basis in fact for making this assumption? Later in your post you mention a poll, which only you have seen, which you claim contradicts this assumption. It almost reads is if you credit Dolar with all of Brewer's votes in order to facilitate your criticism of Dolar's campaign.

 
At April 30, 2007 9:29 AM, Blogger Hugh said...

> Dolar still suffered a net decline in some precincts.

Not true. Dolar GAINED in EVERY precinct from Feb to April.

 
At April 30, 2007 9:32 AM, Blogger Hugh said...

> This is why Stone won. Stone had a much better Election Day than Dolar.

Thanks for posting.

This has been obvious to most people since about 8:30 Tues nite.

 
At April 30, 2007 11:44 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dolar didnt gain enough she lost. It was assumed she would take all Brewer votes which she didnt.We Have Stone 4 more years.

 
At April 30, 2007 11:52 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hugh use your brain between you and Jay in the closet you can figure it out. Thats if you can keep your hand off each other.

 
At April 30, 2007 12:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

JS you keep posting links from the west rogers park group thatdont work. Perhaps you can just cut and paist what was said.

 
At April 30, 2007 1:07 PM, Blogger Hugh said...

> Waht we see here is that ... some voters who were drawn to Greg Brewer could not come out and vote for Dolar.

You present no evidence that anyone who voted for Brewer in Feb did not vote for Dolar in April.

 
At April 30, 2007 2:50 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hugh said...
> Waht we see here is that ... some voters who were drawn to Greg Brewer could not come out and vote for Dolar.

You present no evidence that anyone who voted for Brewer in Feb did not vote for Dolar in April.

April 30, 2007 1:07 PM

Hugh is that what you teach at Depaul.. reverse negative logic?

 
At April 30, 2007 3:47 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you actually think all people who voted Brewer voted dolar NOT !!! Who said they wanted to come out for dolar. I know I did not come out to vote for her. There were several people I know that voted Brewer and said they would not vote for Dolar. I cannot say how they voted.

 
At April 30, 2007 5:26 PM, Blogger Hugh said...

> It was a Turn-Out Election

the candidate who got the most supporters to the polls won

call the Trib & Sun-Times

 
At April 30, 2007 6:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hugh,

You're such an a-hole. If you're going to be so critical start your own blog.

It seems like you just like to criticize everything. Where do you stand? You're just a very negative, sad man.

 
At April 30, 2007 6:55 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

JS,

Why does it seem that all Hugh can do is sit at home and spew out negativity.

If I was Naisy or Greg - I'd distance myself from him. If I was you - I'd block his comments.

Did you see that little piece they distributed in the 49th? Hugh compared low-income housing to something that needed to be burned. He has no sense of compassion - he's disgusting.

- A neighbor who does more than just complain

 
At April 30, 2007 6:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hugh
YOU are a Looser, a Big Looser.

We can all see it was a turn out election and Stone Won. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out. The candidate who got the most supporters to the polls won. No need to call the Trib & Sun-Times either, it was published, Stone was the winner.
THE END

 
At April 30, 2007 7:01 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Hugh is that what you teach at Depaul.. reverse negative logic?

Please dont tell me Hugh teaches at DePaul?? I feel sorry for the kids that go there. Hugh is a complete idiot. I wonder if his students read the shit he posts here. Maybe we should link this to DePaul's web site. LOL

 
At April 30, 2007 7:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hugh
Maybe instead of blogging you should be working around the house. I bet your neighbors would love to see a coat of paint on the windows or the house fixed up some. Spend your time making your neighbors a little happier. get a life !! Go see willow9

 
At May 01, 2007 7:51 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
Hugh is that what you teach at Depaul.. reverse negative logic?

Please dont tell me Hugh teaches at DePaul?? I feel sorry for the kids that go there. Hugh is a complete idiot. I wonder if his students read the shit he posts here. Maybe we should link this to DePaul's web site. LOL

April 30, 2007 7:01 PM

I got a better idea which I am in pthe proces of doing but sening it to the Board of Trustees of the University.

 
At May 01, 2007 8:30 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hugh
Where are You.
Have you nothing to say for yourself??

 
At May 01, 2007 11:58 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You should change the name of this blog to a** kicked in the 50th since it was not that much of a fight…

 
At May 01, 2007 3:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Uh it wasn't quite a fight?

You're an idiot. You must live right next to Stone. That's the only way you couldn't see what was happening.

This election cycle was crazy and the increased turn out shows that. Not just that - alot of money was spent. That wasn't candy they were throwing away.

 
At May 01, 2007 3:41 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Daaaa
Even Stone will tell you it was a fight. Your rite, ton of money went into this campaign. The Union blew a TON and lost LOL. Good for Stone. I guess he showed them the Union U cant push the 50th ward around. All the money they spent couldnt buy the votes they needed to get Stone out.

 
At May 02, 2007 12:27 AM, Anonymous Turned Off by Comments in "Turn Out" said...

Jay--I fear that you will lose not only commenters, but also readers unless you start to moderate comments, and delete those that are illiterate and/or personal attacks.

 
At May 02, 2007 7:56 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Of course, as a Brewer turned Dolar supporter, I was disappointed that Alderman Stone was re-elected. However, barring his resignation from office, due to indictment or the infirmaties of his advanced years, we 50th Ward residents are basically stuck with him as our Alderman until 2011. Therefore, all of this discussion is futile and about as relevant as discussing the further merits of the Constitutional Union Party's abortive campaign for the presidency in 1860!

 
At May 02, 2007 8:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Turned Off by Comments in "Turn Out" said...
Jay--I fear that you will lose not only commenters, but also readers unless you start to moderate comments, and delete those that are illiterate and/or personal attacks.

May 02, 2007 12:27 AM

Please start with Hugh

 
At May 02, 2007 10:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

From what I see you have already
lost commenters and readers.

 
At May 02, 2007 2:01 PM, Blogger Hugh said...

> This is why Stone won.

When you start asking & answering "why" questions, you are getting into the realm of causality. Perhaps you can demonstrate a correlation between turn-out and voter preference at the precinct level, it doesn't mean the higher turn-out CAUSED a particular preference. Correlation is not causality. A common blunder is to confuse the two.

You are inferring how people voted from their precinct result. Turn-out was higher in precinct X, precinct X went for candidate Y, therefore the "new" voters in precinct X went for candidate Y. Ultimately, voting is private, and much of what you are presenting is speculation. I assume you don't have any privileged information on how anyone voted.

 
At May 05, 2007 3:16 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Everyone says Noonan is this big genius. The machine brings him in to save whoever is in trouble, and when he succeeds, everyone loves him. What they don't mention is that he always has EVERY resource at his disposal. I'd like to see how he would handle an underfunded candidate who is not owned part and parcial by Daley or Madigan.

 
At May 05, 2007 4:08 PM, Blogger Jay said...

Yes, Noonan comes with relationships that he can mobilize. That's not really a secret. I think it's more important to understand that Ald. Stone needed Noonan in order to stave off a challenge by someone who also had every resource at her disposal: Schkawosky, SEIU, extraordinary media attention. Noonan essentially acted as an equalizer for all the advantages that Dolar brought into this race.

 
At May 06, 2007 11:41 AM, Blogger Hugh said...

> ... a challenge by someone who also had every resource at her disposal: Schkawosky, SEIU, extraordinary media attention.

> ... all the advantages that Dolar brought into this race.

this is really twisted

you are glorifying Stone by attempting to portray him as the underdog

who you crappin?

 
At May 06, 2007 12:01 PM, Blogger Hugh said...

Your attempt to the re-write the history of his election by casting Stone as the come-from-behind underdog is patently absurd, but I will humor you and take your comment by cases.

An endorsement by a local congressmen was advantage Dolar?

Let's remind ourselves of Stone's endorsements:

Mayor Richard M. Daley

United States Congressman Rahm Emmanuel

Cook County Democratic Party Chairman Joseph Berrios

City Clerk Miguel Del Valle

Democratic Club of the 50th Ward

50th Ward Republican Organization

Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce

Chicago Journeyman Plumbers Union Local 139

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 134

Sheet Metal Workers International Association Local 73

National Electrical Contractors Association of the City of Chicago

State Senator Ira Silverstein

Water Reclamation District President Terrence O’Brien

State Representative Lou Lang

Cook County Commissioner Lawrence Suffredin

Cook County Commissioner Forrest Claypool

Cook County Commissioner Mike Quigley

Jewish Political Alliance of Illinois

Jewish Star Newspaper

Polish Daily New

Polish National Alliance

Mexican American Democratic Organization

Italian American Political Coalition

Bosnian-American Cultural Association and SDA Chicago USA for Bosnia and Herzegovina

FIA (Federation of Indian Association Chicago)

Indian American Friends of 50th Ward

Chicago Sikh Temple

American Muslim Alliance PAC

United Hellenic Voters of America

Pakistan Federation of Amerca

Pakistan Independence Day Parade Committee

Besides, we need to copy out this list from Stone's website before he takes it down, so we know who to thank over the next 4 years as this term unfolds.

Now we know that some of these endorsements are bogus, but to claim that one congressman's endorsement gave the advantage to Dolar is just ridiculous.

In fact if you were even marginally competent on the subject you are blogging about, you need read no further than the 1st endorsement on Stone's list to recognize that NO ONE's endorsement would outweigh it. Daley-controlled PAC dough, Daley's image on mailers, Daley robo-calls, Daley personal appearances, and Daley election day workers were a huge advantage Stone.

Get real.

 
At May 06, 2007 12:46 PM, Blogger Hugh said...

You are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to your own reality.

> ... a challenge by someone who also had every resource at her disposal

> ... all the advantages that Dolar brought into this race.

Incumbency is a huge advantage in a Chicago aldermanic race, usually insurmountable. For you to post that Dolar had every advantage is just plain silly.

To take just one very obvious example, Stone ran for re-election while dragging out a negotiation with Walgreen's over a package of City subsidies and over which property on Western to condemn so Walgreen's could close an existing store and build a new one. This was an advantage of tens of thousands of dollars for Stone.

Dolar did not have public subsidies or zoning changes to peddle in return for campaign contributions.

Keep it real, bro.

 
At May 06, 2007 12:50 PM, Blogger Jay said...

Of course, Hugh. How dare anyone disagree with your opinion on the subject?

Your problem is that you aren't the least bit objective here, and you seem to need to read absurdity into something when you disagree with it. No one said that Stone was the underdog in this race, nor would a reasonable person have jumped to that conclusion from what I wrote.

If you don't like what I write here, you are free to disagree. The fact that you have to belittle other people's opinions reminds me of someone. He doesn't live in an ivory tower, but he does live in a tower, too.

 
At May 06, 2007 5:33 PM, Anonymous Toddler Noonan said...

Bernie Stone won because of Salman Aftab and not Mike Noonan.

Naisy's husband cost it for her.

 
At May 06, 2007 5:57 PM, Anonymous Jay said...

LOL. You seem to have no problem with deciding what is my reality! I never denied that Stone had advantages. For some reason, you are so obsessed with Stone's advantages that you are blind to the considerable advantages Dolar brought to the race.

Just keeping it real.

 
At May 06, 2007 10:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hugh

I have to say you are a JOKE !! LOL
During the election you were saying how much power Dolar had with all the endorsements, The Tribune, Suntimes,Schkawosky, SEIU,Jessi Jackson Jr, and these are just a few. extraordinary media attention.
> ... all the advantages that Dolar brought into this race.
this is really twisted
I Think not!!
I cant remeber when a candidate got as much media as Dolar did.It got her nowhere.Lets be real Hugh... Face the facts..

 
At May 07, 2007 11:08 AM, Blogger Hugh said...

Don't make me line up Stone's media coverage against Dolar's.

Incumbents in general and incumbent Chicago aldermen in particular have a huge advantage in media access. Stone has an office downtown. He walks out in the hall and reporters are waiting there with cameras and microphones and uncapped pens. 50th ward challengers have to get reporters to come to 7200 N. Let's remind ourselves of a few obvious examples of this differential access.

Stone has his own cable show. Dolar doesn't.

During this election cycle, Stone bravely lead the fight for higher salaries for aldermen, he ground broke Devon & Rockwell, was interviewed in the Sunday Trib magazine, etc., etc.

Stone held a press conferences to release a list of City employees who don't work as hard as him but make more money, to show off his graffitti, to oppose beatings in parks. Etc. Etc.

Stone commented to the press on Daley stealing from the 50th ward, on the outrageous federal witch hunt in City Hall, on an indicted colleague being a sweet girl, on sign stealing, etc., etc.

Stone was an outspoken critic of the living wage ordinance, outspoken critic of court monitoring of City hiring, voted for then became an outspoken critic of the foie gras ban, organized a boycott of Jewel, etc., etc.

To attempt to portray Dolar has having an advantage in media coverage is absurd.

 
At May 07, 2007 12:31 PM, Blogger Hugh said...

> ... a challenge by someone who also had every resource at her disposal

Dolar did not have EVERY resource at her disposal. One resource Stone had which Dolar did not was the ability to dole out our property tax dollars and leases.

For example, Stone arranged a $5M gift from our property taxes to the owners of the Lincoln Village mall, home of his taxpayer-rented office, his PAC's office, and his favorite restaurant. And the owners of the mall expressed their gratitude by contributing to Stone's PACs.

BGP Lincoln Village L.L.C., TIF-subsidized redeveloper of Lincoln
Village Mall

$500.00 4/19/2005 to Democratic Club of the 50th Ward
$500.00 4/26/2006

$2,627.46 8/20/2002 to Bernard L Stone Campaign Committee

Terraco
Scott Gendell, President and Chief Executive Officer
Lead investor in BGP Lincoln Village LLC

$500.00 5/7/2002 to Democratic Club of the 50th Ward
$500.00 5/14/2003
$500.00 5/11/2004

$1,000.00 1/13/2003 to Bernard L Stone Campaign Committee

Dolar did not have leases and public subsidies to peddle.

 
At May 07, 2007 12:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hugh is right. You can't beat Stone. Naisy certainly didn't have a chance, more Asian-Americans voted for Stone than her! Stone's advantages are insurmountable, he is all-powerful, all-knowing and much beloved by the REAL people in the 50th! No way you can top that.

 
At May 07, 2007 2:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hugh!!
Again I ask this one simple little question??
When has a candidate got as much media as Dolar did ???
You seem to go around in circles, you must be a BIG Wheel!! LOL

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home