Joined: February 7th, 2008, 5:54 pm

November 8th, 2017, 12:39 pm #61

The notion that the tombstone kerfuffle influenced this election in any way is not necessarily so, anyway. 

Lots of good candidates.... so some folks get bounced.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

November 8th, 2017, 1:09 pm #62

Exactly.  I don't understand why anyone would assume that a specific candidate would automatically be re-elected given the large and excellent field.  I think Joe O did a good job and worked hard but so did many of the other incumbents.  Joe C lost his seat as well and he had no kerfluffle.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

November 8th, 2017, 1:35 pm #63

Turnout was pretty low, too - 29.17%.

(2013 - 39.46% (Kirk/Bell)   2015 - 48.89% (Theken/McGeary))

I thought that the at-large race would draw a better turnout.  Did people just stay home because there was no mayoral race to speak of and only one ward race and they didn't care about the at-large?  Did some candidates do a better job of getting their supporters out to vote?  I wonder if the turnout was better in Ward 2 than other wards because they had a ward council race and if so, did that have any effect on the at-large result?  Way too many factors to say definitively that any candidate won or lost for a single reason.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 25th, 2008, 12:11 am

November 8th, 2017, 1:57 pm #64

Joe O's sister cost him the election period!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 7th, 2008, 5:54 pm

November 8th, 2017, 2:36 pm #65

gloman wrote: Joe O's sister cost him the election period!
Another colorful piece of Gloucester lore is born!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 25th, 2007, 6:00 pm

November 8th, 2017, 2:47 pm #66

... but the turnout was lower in Ward 2 than in the outer wards.
Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?...   ..........
 George Orwell , 1984
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

November 8th, 2017, 3:17 pm #67

I saw that after I posted.  I didn't realize that the City had result pages up for each ward - didn't scroll down, lol.  Wards 2 and 3 had the lowest turnouts, ward 4 the largest.  O'Hara topped the ticket in Magnolia - no surprise - with Holmgren just one vote behind him and Holmgren topped the ticket in 5-2. Cox topped both precincts in Ward 2 - no surprise there either.

The two wards with the lowest turnouts also have the lowest number of registered voters.

Ward 4 had the best turnout and has the second highest number of registered voters so basically, it's all Lanesville's fault. :-)

http://gloucester-ma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/4618
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 25th, 2007, 6:00 pm

November 8th, 2017, 3:44 pm #68

5771 uncast ballots for councilor at large. I voted for three of four. There must have been a lot of other people who could not support four from the list.
Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?...   ..........
 George Orwell , 1984
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 15th, 2006, 1:02 am

November 8th, 2017, 4:00 pm #69

I was a 3/4 too
You think you know it, but you haven't got a clue!!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 25th, 2008, 12:11 am

November 8th, 2017, 4:25 pm #70

DM3194 wrote:
gloman wrote: Joe O's sister cost him the election period!
Another colorful piece of Gloucester lore is born!
I see you have your ears up your ass instead of on the streets.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

November 8th, 2017, 4:57 pm #71

Damon wrote: 5771 uncast ballots for councilor at large. I voted for three of four. There must have been a lot of other people who could not support four from the list.
I don't think that's unusual for at-large.  There's the bullet vote thing that some people do.  I know one who bulleted O'Hara and one who bulleted Holmgren.  Sometimes I do vote for 4, sometimes not.

Unless I'm looking at it incorrectly and/or this is beyond my mathematical capabilities - both completely possible - the percentage of uncast votes this time is actually smaller than the last two municipal elections?  (Feel free to correct me anyone - I really won't mind.)

Total votes/uncast votes, at-large:

2017 - 19245/5771

2015 - 27773/10963

2013 - 24871/8373

I'm just not seeing any big anti-Orlando vote.   He placed only in 2-1 and 3-1, wards with low numbers of registered voters and lower turnout than other wards.  Ward 5 came out for the home-town kids, Holmgren and O'Hara, as did Ward 2 for Cox.  O'Hara topped the ticket in 4-1  (Bayview showing their fire station support?).  Lundberg topped the ticket in 4-2 - (does he live in Annisquam?).
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

November 8th, 2017, 5:19 pm #72

Actually, I'm not getting the total votes/uncast votes at all, lol ...    wait, I think I am ...
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 7th, 2008, 5:54 pm

November 8th, 2017, 5:34 pm #73

It would be considered tacky and bad manners for a candidate ever
to promote bullet voting in a multi-vote election like our at-large race.

But it is certainly a normal thing to to. Common with regular voters, and
especially a regular tactic for operatives or campaign workers for a particular
candidate.

If you like one candidate above all the others, you are actually voting
against yourself if you cast a second vote. That's just the math of it.

Some people struggle to fill out the ballot, because they feel some
kind of obligation to use all four, or six, of their votes. They vote for 
people they have never heard of or don't know....just to not waste a 
vote. That seems odd to me. Blanks are OK.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

November 8th, 2017, 9:10 pm #74

I think any variation is fine...I just like people to vote...even if it means a blank ballot for some positions...that shows they care enough to show up.  I wrote in Cathy Tarr for Mayor in the preliminary but voted for Sefatia (who I do like)  yesterday.

I worked hard for one of the at-large candidates but I still cast all 4 votes.  I felt very good about her candidacy and felt she would place in the top 4.  I also felt strongly about several other candidates based on my personal experience with them in their current council positions.  I would have felt badly if I had bullet voted and those other candidates didn't get in too.  If I had only felt good about 1 candidate, then I would have only voted for one.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 25th, 2007, 6:00 pm

November 9th, 2017, 4:08 am #75

By the way in 1975 I mentioned my intention to bullet vote to a city official.
I was told not to leave blanks because someone might fill them in and to write in names instead.
I ignored the advice, but I suppose it might happen.
Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?...   ..........
 George Orwell , 1984
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 7th, 2008, 5:54 pm

November 9th, 2017, 4:18 am #76

Damon,
I hope you at least bullet-voted yourself when you ran for office.
Had you done so, you might have won!
................
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 8th, 2007, 8:25 pm

November 9th, 2017, 10:13 am #77

DM3194 wrote: The notion that the tombstone kerfuffle influenced this election in any way is not necessarily so, anyway. 

Lots of good candidates.... so some folks get bounced.



2015 at-large results (https://www.gloucester-ma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/4076):

Code: Select all

4708  16.95%  Lundberg
4430  15.95%  Ciolino
3706  13.34%  Orlando
3438  12.38%  O'Hara
----------------------
3010  10.84%  Whynott

2017 at-large results:

Code: Select all

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YOAt-7xHzy2tBB6osiQMRikhPpxJA2fMhR8Rz1p5DqU/edit#gid=1028894354

3273  17.01%  Cox
3195  16.60%  Lundberg
3144  16.34%  Holmgren
2648  13.76%  O'Hara
---------------------
2492  12.95%  Ciolino
2252  11.70%  Orlando

The numbers:  

In 2015, Orlando beat O'Hara by 268 votes.  Put another way, he got about 8% more votes than O'Hara.

In 2017, Orlando lost to O'Hara by 396 votes.  Put another way, he got about 15% fewer votes than O'Hara.

So Orlando saw a 23% drop in votes, relative to O'Hara.  

I believe that the bulk of this is due to the fact that his campaign manager stirred up the international media shit-storm about the tombstone, causing WP staff to receive threats, and requiring a police presence for two weeks.  And I believe that this is due to Joe's failure to say that his campaign manager made a mistake.

What do you think it is due to?
Last edited by Martin Del Vecchio on November 9th, 2017, 11:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

November 9th, 2017, 10:21 am #78

It wasn't the same race.  With Melissa Cox and Jen Holmgren in the mix there were different choices.  Perhaps Jamie had more voters who didn't find 4 of the other candidates a better choice than Orlando did simply given the different roster of candidates.
Last edited by Karly on November 9th, 2017, 10:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

November 9th, 2017, 10:27 am #79

In 2015, Orlando topped the ticket in 2-1 and 3-1.  They are the only ward precincts that he placed in the top 4 in this election (4th in 2-1, 3rd in 3-1).  Turnout in both those precincts was down by almost half from 2015 - 41.75% down to 24.51% in 2-1 and 40.97% down to 23.24% in 3-1.

His supporters didn't show up?

Ward 5 came out for the home-town kids, Holmgren and O'Hara, as did Ward 2 for Cox.  O'Hara topped the ticket in 4-1  (Bayview showing their fire station support?).  Lundberg topped the ticket in 4-2 - (does he live in Annisquam?).

Does anyone think that any votes for the top 4 in this election were simply anti-Orlando votes?

I just think that more voters preferred other candidates.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

November 9th, 2017, 10:30 am #80

I agree.  I think really highly of the top candidates and think others do as well. I saw a lot of positive support for the candidates that won all through the election.
Quote
Like
Share