Wednesday, April 25, 2007

A Vote Divided

April 17 exposed the wounds. The 50th Ward is unusually divided, and this election showed that.

The final result, with Stone getting 53% and Dolar receiving 47%, seemed like a close election, but that was true mostly in the totals. Close elections tend to bunch up in the middle, with a large percentage of electoral districts returning results between 55% to 45% for two candidates. For example, the 2004 Presidential Election followed the normal pattern, with fully 20 states bunching up in the middle. The April 17th runoff election, in contrast, had 4 precincts bunched up in the middle, between 55% to 45% for Stone (or Dolar).

The 2004 Presidential Election saw one "state," the District of Columbia, with the winner over 75% of the vote in that electoral district. The April 17th election had 14 precincts where the winner had 75% or more of votes (seven for Stone and seven for Dolar). Instead of the Bell Curve that we are all familiar with, the April 17th election had a decidedly inverted Bell Curve, with an overwhelming majority of precincts returning a winner of 65% or more. Only 14 precincts had a winner with less than 65% of the votes. The 2004 Presidential Election had only 6 states return a winner with 65% or more.


Stone

> 75% (7): 31, 12, 16, 38, 11, 14, 44
65-74% (10): 34, 45, 39, 40, 25, 23, 33, 30, 5, 27
55-64% (8): 41, 10, 3, 28, 17, 24, 1, 26
50-54% (3): 19, 18, 2

50-54% (1): 13
55-64% (2): 32, 4
65-74% (7): 42, 29, 8, 9, 6, 22, 43
> 75% (7): 15, 37, 35, 36, 21, 20, 7

Dolar

It's difficult to fathom just how divided the 50th Ward is now. But there does seem to be a big black line (actually California) separating the two 50th's. That separation isn't complete, since precincts 18, 19, 28 and 34 are east of California and went for Stone. But as the graphic above shows, voters west of California do seem to love Ald. Stone, while voters east of California mostly do not care for him.

I would guess that this graphic corresponds closely to the level of city services received in each precinct.

Labels: , , , ,

15 Comments:

At April 25, 2007 8:24 PM, Blogger Hugh said...

> The 50th Ward is unusually divided

This may be true, but this conclusion is not supported by the evidence you present without more rigorous analysis. You may be reading too much into this.

> Close elections tend to bunch up in the middle

Not necessarily. The ward went 53-47, but that does not mean you should expect each precinct to go 53-47, in fact it would be very unlikely for it to be so.

> Only 14 precincts had a winner with less than 65%

There's 45 precincts. Some precincts went for one candidate, other precincts for the other. Some precincts went strongly for one candidate, other precincts strongly for the other.

> The April 17th election had 14 precincts where the winner had 75% or more

Here you are lumping the 2 tails together to make a point.

> Instead of the Bell Curve that we are all familiar with

The "bell curve" is there. You need to test before concluding the subpopulations are not normal.

> there does seem to be a big black line (actually California) separating the two 50th's.

There's a big black line because you drew it there. Lots of folks west of California voted for Dolar, and lots of folks east voted for Stone.

> The 50th Ward is unusually divided

The ward is united in apathy. Non-voting occurred more often than a vote for Stone or Dolar combined.

 
At April 25, 2007 9:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your both full of shit
LOL
Jay is still looking for a gay friend Hugh help him out. You guys will like each other.You have a lot in common

 
At April 25, 2007 9:46 PM, Anonymous p.t. baer said...

"The final result ... seemed like a close election, but that was true mostly in the totals."

Of course, it's the totals that determine who wins.

Comparing precincts in the city election to states in the presidential is a poor analogy, especially since states alone give such a poor representation of the results.

With all due respect to Hugh's observations, it seems clear that Stone has worked to solidify and maintain his base west of California. That's where he, his family and his staff all live. That's where the ward service office is located. And that's where the majority of Jewish voters live.

Oh, yeah, Jay didn't mention anything about Jewish voters. Could this be significant? Judge for yourself. Stone has clearly defined his support in religious terms as shown by this quote from a campaign flyer distributed, no doubt, in only part of the ward: "Alderman Stone is a true, committed friend to all Synogogues, Jewish Schools and Jewish Communal Organizations ... Vote for Our Community and Re-elect Alderman Stone."

A vote for Ald. Stone is a vote for the Jewish way of life and the State of Israel. Stone does not hesitate to label his opponents anti-semites. Any criticism of him is an attack on Judaism.

So how do we get past this divisive manipulation of ethnic and religious identity? I've looked at the election results. I understand the numbers. But this is the question I can't yet answer. I think this is the question we must answer.

 
At April 25, 2007 10:12 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Its not only the Jewish vote Stone got at least 75% of the Muslim vote.Dony kid yourself. They are also his family.

 
At April 26, 2007 9:01 AM, Blogger Hugh said...

> Stone got at least 75% of the Muslim vote

May I ask, what is your source on this?

 
At April 26, 2007 9:04 AM, Anonymous p.t. baer said...

"... Stone got at least 75% of the Muslim vote."

That may be true, but you haven't done anything to convince me. I don't have any good way to know how Muslims voted, but Stone didn't do all that well in the precincts I'd guess have the highest Muslim population, namely:

8 - 32%
19 - 55%
22 - 34%
24 - 56%
26 - 55%
29 - 31%
32 - 42%
43 - 35%

Of course, the Muslim vote could be higher than the precinct totals, but I don't have any way to measure that.

In any case, Stone identifies with Jewish voters in a way he can't with Muslim voters, which makes his relationship with Muslims less problematic. He has to give Muslims reasons other than religion to vote for him and he can't deflect criticism by talking about "our community" as he does with Jews. This means that a challenger can criticize Stone's relationship with a Muslim banker or developer without being subject to charges of anti-semitism. Instead, it becomes a discussion about real issues.

 
At April 26, 2007 10:40 AM, Anonymous p.t. baer said...

"Stone didn't do all that well in the precincts I'd guess have the highest Muslim population."

No offense to precinct captain Anish, who I'm sure did a fine job (on city time).

 
At April 26, 2007 3:50 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stone wins 28 precincts
Dolar wind 17 precincts

 
At April 27, 2007 11:59 AM, Anonymous Noorani said...

p.t.baer: Stone got Muslim votes beacuse of Aftab's endorsement.
btw, Anish is not a Muslim.

 
At April 27, 2007 4:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Noorani said...
p.t.baer: Stone got Muslim votes beacuse of Aftab's endorsement.
btw, Anish is not a Muslim

BS Aftab only got 500 votes we have more than 500 muslims here. LOL

 
At April 27, 2007 5:55 PM, Blogger Hugh said...

> Stone got Muslim votes

The Board of Elections does not report votes by race or religion. What is your source for this?

 
At April 30, 2007 9:34 AM, Blogger Hugh said...

> It's difficult to fathom just how divided the 50th Ward is now.

No, it's not. The ward is divided roughly 53-47.

 
At April 30, 2007 11:49 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The ward is divided, and not by the line on California. It is divided through the neighborhood's.
Look at all the shame and smear people put on these blogs. This in itself divided people. Think about it. I live in the ward a short time and to see what has gone on during this election makes me sick. I cant believe I live among these people.

 
At May 01, 2007 7:38 AM, Blogger Hugh said...

> Look at all the shame and smear people put on these blogs.

Please can you be more specific?

 
At May 01, 2007 2:27 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hugh!!
You of all people ask to be more specific ??? Just look at some of the postings you have posted on some of these blogs. You should crawl in a hole somewhere, or better yet stop blogging and fix that Rat house of yours..

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home