Election 2010: How the late absentees are breaking


Lots of votes still to count in San Francisco -- as of this morning, the Department of Elections said there were about 80,000 absentee and provisional ballots in the hopper. But some have been counted yesterday and today, and we can draw some conclusions.

Typically election-day absentees break fairly close to the way election-day votes break, and Kamala Harris is citing that -- and her campaign's own analysis -- to claim victory;

"Uncounted ballots will only bolster Kamala Harris's lead, as they will reflect Harris's strong Election Day advantage."

In San Francisco, though, I've seen progressive measures that won on election day go down to defeat when the late votes, which were not as conservative as the early absentees but more conservative than election-day votes -- were counted.

We now have the newest results from the DOE, and a little quick math gives us some interesting trends. In D2, Janet Reilly has (marginally) increased her lead over Mark Farrell. She's gone from 6253 yesterday to 6512 today, a pickup of 259 votes. Farrell picked up only 223. So Reilly will probably still lead this race when all the votes are counted, but the RCV calculation will depend entirely on whether supporters of the third and fourth candidates, Abraham Simmons and Kat  Anderson, were voting for Anyone But Reilly or were willing to put Reilly as a second choice.

In D6, Jane Kim picked up about 100 votes over Debra Walker, enough to make her the clear front-runner. Again, though: Do the more conservative Theresa Sparks votes go to Kim,  whose supporters tried to portray Walker as part of a liberal machine and who touted her support for Prop. G, or do a sizable number go to Walker, another LGBT candidate?

D10? Not much has changed.  Tony Kelly picked up 65 votes. Lynette Sweet picked up 80. Malia Cohen picked up 72. Steve Moss picked up 64. The rankings aren't going to change much. But this will be the mother of all RCV elections -- and we'll know more tomorrow, when DOE does its first RCV pass.





2 reasons:

1) The Sparks campaign did not make a huge deal about her being transgender in their contact with voters, and therefore really didn't mention gay, at least in the mail I got. There wont be as many identity LGBT voters to translate.

2) The LGBT Sparks people may not have been supporting Kim, but they HATED Walker. The old Milk/Alice divide. That translated to conversations with voters.

Sparks ballots may exhaust, go to another minor conservative candidate and the like, and sure Walker will get a share, but so will Kim. Walker will need a lot to go her way to make up the deficit, and I just don't see it coming from Sparks.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 04, 2010 @ 5:04 pm

A Chicken In Every Pot......Fuck You It's My Farm.
I dont think this is what Harvey fought and died for.

Posted by Guest. Patrick Monk.RN on Nov. 04, 2010 @ 5:57 pm

Champagne corks are flying. Potrero Hill is collectively breathing a very deep sigh of relief that Steve Moss was a loser in this D10 supervisor race. To give the appearance of living in our district, the guy strategically rented a house on our block 8 months ago. What a nightmare that's been. He sloganeered with well-tested themes like "sustainability," while spending more money than any other candidate to trash our community all the way down to Hunter's Point with thousands of his insipid tracts, door hangers and posters. Who's going to clean it all up? Not Steve Moss. To find out more about what kind of neighbor Steve Moss is, check out: http://problemneighbor.net/

Posted by Guest on Nov. 05, 2010 @ 9:11 am

@by Guest on Nov. 05, 2010 @ 9:11 am,

you chicken shit, why didn't you have the balls to confront Moss about the dog or better kill the fucking dog, baseball bat across the top of the head! Quit bitching, if you were too afraid to do anything, fuck off.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 05, 2010 @ 11:24 am

Hi Steve. Please fasten your seatbelt and put your tray table and seatback in their full upright positions. You know all those groups of people who endorsed you and stuffed your pockets with hundreds of thousands of dollars? Thanks to our wondrous internets, each and every one of those people is about to get a unique and up-close insight into just what kind of a person they chose to represent themselves. Have a nice flight.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 05, 2010 @ 7:31 pm

Come on SFBG- realize it's happy hour -isn't this big news...? A win for fiscal sanity?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 05, 2010 @ 4:08 pm

Gotta love the results of RCV. Not ONE of the Peskin/SFBG candidates is winning. In addition, both Sit/Lie and MUNI reform won by HUGE margins.

I think the moderates are baaaaaaaack!!!! Watch out!!

Posted by Guest2 on Nov. 05, 2010 @ 4:52 pm

As I recall, Peskin personally endorsed Malia Cohen.

Posted by sarah on Nov. 05, 2010 @ 5:23 pm

And the DCCC endorsed Malia Cohen, too. So, if she wins, they should be smiling.

Posted by sarah on Nov. 05, 2010 @ 5:25 pm

Assuming the results hold up (which seems likely) after all the provisionals are finalized, there doesn't appear to be much ideological change to the BOS.

In D8, Weiner would be expected to follow the moderate/conservative votes of Dufty.

In D2, it would be hard for Farrell to be a more worthless supervisior than Alioto-Pier.

In D6, you have to believe that Kim (or Walker) would vote the same on 95% of the issues and that their votes wouldn't be that much different than Daly's (except there will be a lot less nastiness adn divisiveness involved), so that seat seems to retan the stats quo.

And in D10, although Maxwell could occasionally be counted on for a key vote and Cohen's comments about supporting tenant evictions for TIC/condo conversions is very troublesome, hopefully she'll keep an open mind about her support for tenant evictions once she becomes more aware what her viewpoint means for a rapidly gentrifying Bayview District. She got a lot of votes from other AA candidates who presumably had supporters who live in rental apartments. These voters won't be around in 4 years if their rental apartments start rapidly converting to TIC's/condos for all of those high-priced Silicon Valley workers who like the easier commute to their jobs in the South Bay.

I hope folks like Mar, Avalos and Campos have started to formulate a game plan for the best choice(s) for interim mayor, which is the real issue at stake here. I think most of us would trust their judgement as to what's possible and who would have a reasonable chance to be elected next November.

All in all, not much has changed at the BOS.

Also worth noting is that I think IRV showed that is makes financial sense even if it might be possible to change the result in D10 with a run-off between Cohen and Kelly. That would be ofset by a massive effort in D8 to try to get Mandelman over the top that I think would fail and Weinew would still be the winner. A run-off between Kim and Walker I think gets to the same result as the IRV vote - Kim wins.

A run-off in D2 would be interesting mainly because Clint Reilly has so much campaign experience, but I think the "anyone but Janet" counter-campaign would lead to the same result as we got under IRV assuming the non-Janet voters showed up in December. The huge increase in vote-by-mail takes away the GOTV advantage that progressives could use in past years to get their voters to the polls in a run-off election.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 05, 2010 @ 5:43 pm

The real story is that Mark Farrell, a complete unknown who was written off by everyone, is winning in a shocker in D2. Ironic that it's the opposite of the Guardian's typical line: this time the unknown candidate with real history and roots in the district who runs a true grass roots campaign is the moderate - and he is beating the moneybags candidate with all of the endorsements (Newsom, DCCC, Pelosi, Feinstein, Guardian, Kopp, Jordan, you name it).

Malia Cohen will be a good supe in D10. But that race isn't over either - there are enough absentees to count that could push Sweet ahead.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 06, 2010 @ 12:00 am