Author |
Message |
   
steel
Citizen Username: Steel
Post Number: 1087 Registered: 2-2002
| Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 8:55 pm: |
|
Dave, (wow time pressure). OK, -Frankly I didn't understand the part about "not being friends of people of color" even though as Lydia pointed out: "I'm so liberal I'm friends with poor black people", (actually only rich black people, I mean I can't been seen with just ANYONE). Seriously, not only did I not understand it but I thought it was unnecessary given the context of the mailer discussion. Beyond that, as someone else mentioned, I think it was quite clear that he was just pissed off about the insipid parking mailer. Did you expect a different answer from me and was it fast enough for you? Do I get a hug now? |
   
Factvsfiction
Citizen Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 641 Registered: 4-2006
| Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 9:00 pm: |
|
Lest I be drawn and quartered, everything I have read here on MOL about your election leads me to conclude: 1) People felt more comfortable about the incumbents or less comfortable about their challengers, take your pick. 2) People would prefer Profeta as your Mayor, rather than Huemer at this time. Things can always change as they have in MSH over the past three years,so everyone gets another chance. Might I suggest that the losers' supporters suck it up and stop treating their fellow democrats like they treat George Bush, and the winners reach out to and consider the opinions of those that opposed them? Otherwise you are going to have lots of acrimony for a very long time. |
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 9786 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 9:07 pm: |
|
When you say you "don't understand it" what does that mean? You don't understand the words or the motivation? I understand both plainly. (that's a rhetorical question) |
   
Lydia
Supporter Username: Lydial
Post Number: 1932 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 9:15 pm: |
|
Steel;
Quote:"I'm so liberal I'm friends with poor black people", (actually only rich black people, I mean I can't been seen with just ANYONE). Seriously, not only did I not understand it but I thought it was unnecessary given the context of the mailer discussion. Beyond that, as someone else mentioned, I think it was quite clear that he was just pissed off about the insipid parking mailer.
I guess. Except you wrote about your poor black friend before the parking mailer. |
   
Wendy
Supporter Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2584 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 9:48 pm: |
|
I'm trying to decide if I have more of a problem with people who spell the word where they lost something as "loose" or with people who put commas before parenthesis. It's probably a toss-up. But if it comes down to those factors in deciding who to vote for I'll probably nix the parenthesis before loosing it. Of course I've already made up my mind as to which faction has been the cause of the greatest rift. That was a no-brainer. Wendy Lauter Proud resident of District 19, Maplewood, NJ |
   
The Dub
Citizen Username: Hill_16
Post Number: 14 Registered: 10-2005
| Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 10:22 pm: |
|
I guess its going to take "Bart" Albini to make the maplecrats one big happy family until next year |
   
Wendy
Supporter Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2587 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 10:28 pm: |
|
Oh yes. We on MOL will always be willing to take advice from someone named the The Dub. You can bet our grandchildren's environment and security on that one. |
   
TomR
Citizen Username: Tomr
Post Number: 1141 Registered: 6-2001
| Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 10:32 pm: |
|
Lydia, I'm sorry I attempted to engage you. You want to play the ever popular MOL game of post-election political bashing. I didn't play before the election; and now, its not only not my cup of tea, but its pointless as well. I rose to your bait. I just should have asked why you addressed me specifically. In parting, I will leave you, and the others here, with some food for thought. You were incorrect in your earlier posting that the town is once again split. Yesterday's election results make it very clear that most registered voters in Maplewood are of a like mind. After all, The overwhelming majority expressed the same thought. They didn't care enough to cast a ballot. Do good, fare well. TomR |
   
The Dub
Citizen Username: Hill_16
Post Number: 15 Registered: 10-2005
| Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 10:35 pm: |
|
Wendy you may know your grammar but you obviously don't know the difference between an observation and advice. Here is some free advice - chill out Also Al Gore has a lot to say about the environment and your grandchildren won't be around for it but thats another forum Rub a Dub Dub |
   
ajc
Citizen Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5164 Registered: 9-2001

| Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 11:56 pm: |
|
"As a newly elected district leader duly elected by democrats..." Congrats and very best wishes Steel. Sorry I missed you on Tuesday. If I knew you were coming I would have had breakfast waiting for you... |
   
steel
Citizen Username: Steel
Post Number: 1088 Registered: 2-2002
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 12:01 am: |
|
I should really follow Tom's example as regards Lydia and additionally Dave (particularly since this thread started with a few simple references to election results) but briefly; Lydia, What ARE you trying to say? Now you're quoting a quote that I quoted from you paraphrasing what you thought I said which not only was wrong to begin with but is now totally irrelevant, a joke in it's original form and obvious to everyone I'm sure who read it particularly Ken who I know for sure. It that sounds confusing now you know how Tom and I feel. Dave, I'd like to play some more but I'm afraid that I can't be troubled to provide you with any more answers until you are able to do any of the like in kind. You have of late grown the habit of treating posters and particularly others that you refer to outside these boards with a great deal of disrespect, -ignoring what would be inconvenient for you to confront while asking others to respond to whatever minutiae you mysteriously believe advances whatever is it you're after. I'm not going to be forced to play by your rules as the price of participation when you refuse to lead by example. We have grown to expect it from others who make a caricature of themselves but not from you. The tenor of the board would be more even-keeled and thus long-term sustainable if you held yourself accountable to the same rules that you expect others to oblige in response to you. People can easily participate in this town without participating on MOL. Still, you will not harsh my mellow. Kudos to Ken and Kathy for carrying the day and kudos to Nancy and Lester for stepping up to such an endeavor. PS: Thanks Art!
|
   
johnny
Citizen Username: Johnny
Post Number: 1631 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 12:02 am: |
|
Assuming everyone votes for two candidates, just add up all the votes and divide by two. |
   
Bob K
Supporter Username: Bobk
Post Number: 11759 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 4:31 am: |
|
The District results show that K and K did well in Districts with a large turnout and in their "home" districts that voted at Clinton School. In Districts with low turnout the Maplewood Dems did much better. As I said on election day they tend to be true believers and get to the polls. If Bottomline's turnout figures are correct just 2500 voters will determine who will sit on the TC. I believe there are around 12000 registered voters in Maplewood. If history holds, the general election in November will be just a formality. While ugly, I think Marchman's comment about Vic and Jerry has to be taken in context of a lot of bad blood between the CCR and those two gentlemen.
|
   
C Bataille
Citizen Username: Nakaille
Post Number: 2647 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 9:25 am: |
|
Johnny, you can't assume that everyone votes for two people. I learned last year that a bullet (single) vote sometimes carries more weight. I chose to do that again this year and I'm sure I'm not the only one. |
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 9790 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 9:27 am: |
|
Bob, Where did Marchman comment about Jerry? |
   
Lydia
Supporter Username: Lydial
Post Number: 1933 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 9:36 am: |
|
Steel,
Quote:a joke in it's original form and obvious to everyone I'm sure who read it particularly Ken who I know for sure. It that sounds confusing now you know how Tom and I feel.
Steel, I think you "joke" when you know that you're crossing a line - but I could be over-thinking it. Sometimes a banana is just a banana. TomR - Look, I didn't like it when Vic and Jerry played fast and loose with the truth (and I was outspoken then) and I don't like it when K & K do the same. Actually, I'm much more disappointed when Ken and Kathy aren't truthful because I knocked on a lot of doors for them 3 years ago, and I urged my friends to vote for them because I thought they were both independent thinkers and reformers. |
   
Bob K
Supporter Username: Bobk
Post Number: 11763 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 9:52 am: |
|
Dave, he didn't. Jerry is no longer holding office here. I should have said Vic and David. However, I was focusing on the days when the CCR was viewed as a power base for those (mainly Fred and Ken) who were viewed (correctly) as a potential threat for control of the TC. At that point Jerry was a TC member and the Mayor.
|
   
Larry Seltzer
Citizen Username: Elvis
Post Number: 26 Registered: 4-2006

| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 9:53 am: |
|
More Numbers This is the same table as above with turnout numbers added. All this is still unofficial until certified by the county.
District | Location | Pettis | Leventhal | Adams | Lewis-Powder | Albini | # Voters | # Registered | % Voting | 1 | Town Hall | 63 | 66 | 65 | 64 | 13 | 148 | 633 | 23.38% | 2 | MFD | 125 | 133 | 44 | 40 | 4 | 178 | 975 | 18.26% | 3 | Town Hall | 67 | 55 | 86 | 70 | 8 | 150 | 845 | 17.75% | 4 | Clinton | 57 | 53 | 49 | 52 | 9 | 117 | 625 | 18.72% | 5 | Tuscan | 46 | 41 | 60 | 55 | 6 | 109 | 632 | 17.25% | 6 | Town Hall | 50 | 42 | 74 | 68 | 10 | 135 | 682 | 19.79% | 7 | Morrow | 104 | 106 | 36 | 33 | 11 | 153 | 764 | 20.03% | 8 | Morrow | 151 | 138 | 47 | 31 | 12 | 199 | 678 | 29.35% | 9 | DeHart | 18 | 14 | 38 | 40 | 5 | 63 | 446 | 14.13% | 10 | Clinton | 52 | 48 | 29 | 25 | 4 | 86 | 618 | 13.92% | 11 | DeHart | 40 | 37 | 66 | 66 | 9 | 116 | 847 | 13.70% | 12 | DeHart | 27 | 27 | 52 | 50 | 6 | 88 | 537 | 16.39% | 13 | DeHart | 40 | 38 | 63 | 59 | 13 | 126 | 884 | 14.25% | 14 | Clinton | 37 | 32 | 38 | 44 | 5 | 87 | 403 | 21.59% | 15 | Tuscan | 64 | 58 | 86 | 71 | 7 | 153 | 583 | 26.24% | 16 | Clinton | 41 | 46 | 48 | 41 | 7 | 99 | 608 | 16.28% | 17 | MFD | 103 | 103 | 81 | 70 | 11 | 198 | 784 | 25.26% | 19 | Tuscan | 55 | 46 | 84 | 68 | 4 | 136 | 579 | 23.49% | 20 | Tuscan | 31 | 24 | 74 | 72 | 6 | 109 | 610 | 17.87% | 21 | DeHart | 33 | 35 | 47 | 50 | 5 | 91 | 714 | 12.75% | 22 | Clinton | 88 | 89 | 35 | 40 | 5 | 135 | 637 | 21.19% | Absentee | | 23 | 20 | 20 | 15 | 0 | | | | TOTAL | | 1315 | 1251 | 1222 | 1124 | 160 | 2676 | 14084 | 19.00% | Percent | | 26.77% | 25.47% | 24.88% | 22.88% | NA | | | | Looks like district 2's secret is not high turnout but high registration. Here's the same table sorted by turnout % descending:
District | Location | Pettis | Leventhal | Adams | Lewis-Powder | Albini | # Voters | # Registered | % Voting | 8 | Morrow | 151 | 138 | 47 | 31 | 12 | 199 | 678 | 29.35% | 15 | Tuscan | 64 | 58 | 86 | 71 | 7 | 153 | 583 | 26.24% | 17 | MFD | 103 | 103 | 81 | 70 | 11 | 198 | 784 | 25.26% | 19 | Tuscan | 55 | 46 | 84 | 68 | 4 | 136 | 579 | 23.49% | 1 | Town Hall | 63 | 66 | 65 | 64 | 13 | 148 | 633 | 23.38% | 14 | Clinton | 37 | 32 | 38 | 44 | 5 | 87 | 403 | 21.59% | 22 | Clinton | 88 | 89 | 35 | 40 | 5 | 135 | 637 | 21.19% | 7 | Morrow | 104 | 106 | 36 | 33 | 11 | 153 | 764 | 20.03% | 6 | Town Hall | 50 | 42 | 74 | 68 | 10 | 135 | 682 | 19.79% | 4 | Clinton | 57 | 53 | 49 | 52 | 9 | 117 | 625 | 18.72% | 2 | MFD | 125 | 133 | 44 | 40 | 4 | 178 | 975 | 18.26% | 20 | Tuscan | 31 | 24 | 74 | 72 | 6 | 109 | 610 | 17.87% | 3 | Town Hall | 67 | 55 | 86 | 70 | 8 | 150 | 845 | 17.75% | 5 | Tuscan | 46 | 41 | 60 | 55 | 6 | 109 | 632 | 17.25% | 12 | DeHart | 27 | 27 | 52 | 50 | 6 | 88 | 537 | 16.39% | 16 | Clinton | 41 | 46 | 48 | 41 | 7 | 99 | 608 | 16.28% | 13 | DeHart | 40 | 38 | 63 | 59 | 13 | 126 | 884 | 14.25% | 9 | DeHart | 18 | 14 | 38 | 40 | 5 | 63 | 446 | 14.13% | 10 | Clinton | 52 | 48 | 29 | 25 | 4 | 86 | 618 | 13.92% | 11 | DeHart | 40 | 37 | 66 | 66 | 9 | 116 | 847 | 13.70% | 21 | DeHart | 33 | 35 | 47 | 50 | 5 | 91 | 714 | 12.75% | Absentee | | 23 | 20 | 20 | 15 | 0 | | | | TOTAL | | 1315 | 1251 | 1222 | 1124 | 160 | 2676 | 14084 | 19.00% | Percent | | 26.77% | 25.47% | 24.88% | 22.88% | NA | | | |
|
   
crabby
Citizen Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 656 Registered: 1-2004
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 10:05 am: |
|
District 8 puts out. |
   
Larry Seltzer
Citizen Username: Elvis
Post Number: 28 Registered: 4-2006

| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 10:41 am: |
|
In case anyone wants it, here's the Excel sheet I used to build this |
   
bottomline
Citizen Username: Bottomline
Post Number: 437 Registered: 8-2003
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 11:31 am: |
|
This may be insider baseball -- and I’m definitely indulging my inner geek -- but I think this analysis reveals a lot about both the turnout and the results in Tuesday’s election. This table compares Democratic voter turnout between this primary election and last year’s. Overall turnout was down this year, as we already know. But some districts were down much more than others. The table presents the number of Democratic voters in the primary for this year and last, then calculates the ratio as a percentage. Finally, it is sorted by this percentage, in descending order. At the top we see that District 14 turned out almost as many Dems as last year (93%). On the other hand, at the bottom, we see that Districts 9 and 11 barely turned out half as many voters as last year (51% each). I will leave as an exercise for the reader to how these relative turnouts affected the results of this year’s election.
District | Location | 2005 Dem voters | 2006 Dem voters | 2005/2006 (%) | 14 | Clinton | 88 | 82 | 93% | 15 | Tuscan | 167 | 146 | 87% | 17 | MFD | 220 | 187 | 85% | 8 | Morrow | 224 | 187 | 83% | 22 | Clinton | 157 | 130 | 83% | 1 | Town Hall | 165 | 135 | 82% | 7 | Morrow | 177 | 142 | 80% | 19 | Tuscan | 172 | 132 | 77% | 2 | MFD | 227 | 174 | 77% | 4 | Clinton | 143 | 108 | 76% | 10 | Clinton | 111 | 82 | 74% | 16 | Clinton | 128 | 92 | 72% | 6 | Town Hall | 178 | 125 | 70% | 5 | Tuscan | 152 | 103 | 68% | 3 | Town Hall | 216 | 142 | 66% | 12 | DeHart | 130 | 82 | 63% | 21 | DeHart | 140 | 86 | 61% | 20 | Tuscan | 168 | 103 | 61% | 13 | DeHart | 199 | 113 | 57% | 9 | DeHart | 113 | 58 | 51% | 11 | DeHart | 209 | 107 | 51% | TOTALS | | 3,484 | 2,516 | 72% | |
|
   
Phil Legree
Citizen Username: Fil
Post Number: 33 Registered: 5-2005
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 12:16 pm: |
|
Larry, do you have the district leader numbers? Could you post them? Thanks [never mind. I see 'em in the spreadsheet] |
   
TomR
Citizen Username: Tomr
Post Number: 1143 Registered: 6-2001
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 12:50 pm: |
|
Lydia, I won't engage with you again on this topic. Enjoy your "lies" and scurrilous accusations and, ...... have a nice day. TomR |
   
TomR
Citizen Username: Tomr
Post Number: 1144 Registered: 6-2001
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 1:23 pm: |
|
Bottomline & Larry Thanks for providing the data. I was commin Larry, I think I understand what you've done above. But for the sake of clarity; it appears that the '05 and '06 Dem voters columns reflect the number of people voting for a Democratic candidate; and not the number of persons registered as Democrats who voted. Please confirm. If I am correct, and if you have the numbers for registered Democrats, could you provide same. Thanks again to you both. TomR |
   
Lydia
Supporter Username: Lydial
Post Number: 1934 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 1:36 pm: |
|
TomR - That's the 2nd or 3rd time You've said you won't engage me - fine. However, you haven't come up with one fact to support that K and K didn't lie. Or why Chris Durkin shouldn't recuse himself - if only to avoid the appearance of not playing above board. Now back to the district numbers - which are pretty interesting in a recent historical context (past 4 or 5 years) Dist. 1 has always been a wash for both sides, it has good turnout and both sides work it hard to usually come out with 4 or 5 votes for one side or another. Dist. 17 is usually in the top 3 with turnout, and has been a landslide for Profeta/K and K - until this year. While K and K picked up 20/30 votes - the split is beginning to creep up to a wash, like Dist. 1. Dist 7 & 8 are still consistent - they bring a lot of votes for Profeta, and hover around 40-50 votes for the other side. So that't the big turnout districts. The lower turnout districts have been picking up 10-20 votes in every district and that's what's going to tip the scales one way or the other in the next election I predict. The 150-200 voter turnout districts are reliably going to the polls and we know with the exception of 17 where the votes are - but the low turnout districts are still close, and still without an obvious "tipping point" like 2,7 and 8.
|
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 9798 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 1:43 pm: |
|
"I will not engage you" reminds me of this guy http://youtube.com/watch?v=EsYRQkmVifg&search=bus%20uncle (subtitles are not work-safe) |
   
ajc
Citizen Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5166 Registered: 9-2001

| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 1:55 pm: |
|
"I thought they were both independent thinkers and reformers." What has really changed your mind Lydia? Do you want us to believe they're playing fast and loose with the truth? Why are you more disappointed with Ken and Kathy than Vic and Jerry? Is it because you urged friends to vote for them, or other reasons? Has this also re-changed your mind and support for Vic, David, and Jerry? In your view do you still hold out hope for K&K? The reason I'm interested in where you're coming from is because I thought you had a lot of balls taking the position you did during the election two years ago. Actually, I think you have a lot to offer our town, and I'm sorry to see how you have backed away from your active role in local politics. FWIW, I can still see K&K as independent thinkers and reformers, whereas, V&D are nothing more than kjhsfoiifvoh, paljhvhbuh, and zzjhvskiika!!! Finally, I find more often than not, their (V&D) stands on many issues before the committee are very much out of balance. Often I fail to see them looking at the overall best choices for our community as a whole, and I find them to be increasingly politically one sided and self-serving.
|
   
Larry Seltzer
Citizen Username: Elvis
Post Number: 29 Registered: 4-2006

| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 1:56 pm: |
|
TomR, >>But for the sake of clarity; it appears that the '05 and '06 Dem voters columns reflect the number of people voting for a Democratic candidate; and not the number of persons registered as Democrats who voted. First, this was Bottomline, not me, but I'll be the first to say that I don't understand the distinction you're trying to make. This is about primaries so only registered democrats could vote. |
   
Admiral_dewey
Citizen Username: Admiral_dewey
Post Number: 26 Registered: 6-2005
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 2:29 pm: |
|
"Finally, I find more often than not, their (V&D) stands on many issues before the committee are very much out of balance. Often I fail to see them looking at the overall best choices for our community as a whole, and I find them to be increasingly politically one sided and self-serving". This statement is wrong as the results of the election show. Running off the party line the "Maplewood Democrats" won almost half of the District Leader seats. Nancy Adams or Lester Lewis-Powder were the top vote getters in 14 of 22 districts or 63.6% of the districts. Finally, five districts }or 22% of all the districts in Maplewood overwhelmingly supported Kathy and Ken. Due to the outstanding turnout in these areas Ken and Kathy won the election. However it is becoming increasingly clear that these five districs are the areas of Maplewood that are out of balance.
|
   
Bob K
Supporter Username: Bobk
Post Number: 11764 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 3:08 pm: |
|
Dear Admiral, The question is why did some districts have relatively high turnout (if you can call 25% high) and others didn't. If you look at the figures Larry posted K&K built up big margins in the districts with turnout over 20% and A&LP built up big margins in the districts with low turnout. I don't think that very many would argue that Profeta's base is in the west and Vic's/David's is in the east. However, I still think a higher turnout in the east would have been to K&K's advantage. Vic and David have an energized base among those who consider themselves "progressives" as opposed to merely "liberal" and as I said before these people are going to make it to the polls come hell or high water (or snow storms). A few years ago the Profetanistas were able to generate that kind of enthusiasm when they defeated DeLuca and Ryan. For all sorts of reasons, including apathy they can no longer do this. An interesting point is that the Maplewood Democrats won fewer District Leader races than A&LP won districts, by my count at least.
|
   
TomR
Citizen Username: Tomr
Post Number: 1146 Registered: 6-2001
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 3:37 pm: |
|
Larry, Sorry about that. It was Bottomline to whom I should addressed that part of the post. Sometimes I write fast, sometimes, half fast. (Say it out loud). Non-aligned voters can vote in primaries, or the people at my polling place made a big mistake in letting me in that voting booth. Sorry again if I caused any confusion. TomR |
   
crabby
Citizen Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 657 Registered: 1-2004
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 3:51 pm: |
|
"However it is becoming increasingly clear that these five districs are the areas of Maplewood that are out of balance." What does that mean? Out of balance? with what?
|
   
ajc
Citizen Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5168 Registered: 9-2001

| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 4:00 pm: |
|
"Nancy Adams or Lester Lewis-Powder were the top vote getters in 14 of 22 districts..." Get real! Don't talk to us about Nancy and Lester like they were the top vote getters... please! Listen, without Vic and David's money and support they wouldn't have received enough signatures on their petitions to even get on the ballot...
|
   
bottomline
Citizen Username: Bottomline
Post Number: 438 Registered: 8-2003
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 4:01 pm: |
|
TomR, Larry is correct: only registered party members can vote in primary elections. Non-aligned voters can, indeed, vote in primaries because they are allowed to declare their party affiliation at the poll. If you were unaffiliated when you went to the poll, the election staff asked you for a party affiliation before you voted. They recorded that choice and you are now registered with that party -- you are no longer unaffiliated.
|
   
Hank Zona
Supporter Username: Hankzona
Post Number: 5677 Registered: 3-2002
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 4:10 pm: |
|
Listen, without Vic and David's money and support they wouldn't have received enough signatures on their petitions to even get on the ballot... actually, without Vic and David's parking spot mailing, they might have won.
|
   
bottomline
Citizen Username: Bottomline
Post Number: 439 Registered: 8-2003
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 4:21 pm: |
|
Admiral et al, You need to be careful about reading too much into the notion of “winning” of districts. These are municipal election districts of unequal population whose boundaries were fixed many years ago. The elections for Township Committee, on the other hand, are at-large across the whole town. We analysts, pundits and political junkies like to use the district data because it’s the only geographic data we’ve got for election returns. It can provide much insight into voting patterns throughout the town. It would be wrong, however, to conclude that something is “out of balance” because the winning candidates prevailed in only five districts. The winning candidates won a majority of votes throughout the whole town. (Although, this time around, it was a very slim majority, to be sure.)
|
   
ajc
Citizen Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5169 Registered: 9-2001

| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 4:21 pm: |
|
"...without Vic and David's parking spot mailing, they might have one." Hey, it's about time they did something right...  |
   
Lydia
Supporter Username: Lydial
Post Number: 1935 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 4:29 pm: |
|
Hank - True dat. re: huge turnout in some districts. I've gone over the district turnout so many times, and IMO there's a significant corrollation between hard-working district leaders (they pound the pavement, stay in touch with their constuancies all year, send mailers, and pound the pavement some more) Districts 7,8,17,2, 19 and 1 have at least 1 and often 2 excellent district leaders, and the turnout reflects their effectiveness. If you look at 17 which has had DL turnover and no DL for a few months, it shows with this year's numbers compared to the last 2-3 years. |
   
bottomline
Citizen Username: Bottomline
Post Number: 440 Registered: 8-2003
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 4:37 pm: |
|
Hank, Your point is well taken. For a close election, it's interesting to speculate about which factors tipped the balance. Here we are talking about a mere 30 votes difference compared to the 1,250 or so needed to win. Fascinating.
|
   
Admiral_dewey
Citizen Username: Admiral_dewey
Post Number: 27 Registered: 6-2005
| Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 4:38 pm: |
|
Sir, Look at the results. I indicated Kathy and Ken won the election due to high turnout in districts 2,7, 8, 17, and 22. However, Nancy or Lester received more votes in over 63% of the Maplewood districts. Those are just the facts. More importantly, what does this mean. Only time will tell. Now about your statement: "Listen, without Vic and David's money and support they wouldn't have received enough signatures on their petitions to even get on the ballot"... How do you know how much money Vic and David contributed? I would imagine that many individuals contributed to Nancy and Lester's campaign. As far as support we all know that Kathy and Ken recieved support and money from Fred. So what? All candidates get money and support from people who believe in them.
|