.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

 k / o
                                       politics + culture

Tuesday, June 06, 2006

a long night ahead in California...but especially Alameda County

Try Trail Mix for an inside take on CA-50...(or better yet go to trusted "election night central" at dailykos.)

and SayNotoPombo has updates and commentary on CA-11's interesting results on both sides of the primary battle.

And, as far as Alameda County....let's just say it's going to be so long a night (they are manually feeding every paper ballot into machines at a central location)...that it will probably be morning before we have all the precincts in. And, yes, in any close State-wide Democratic CA race that's going to mean we're ALL going to be waiting on Alameda County.

More here as soon as I know it.

Update 1: SF Gate has some Oakland Mayoral initial returns:

Ron Dellums: 11,800 (44.3%)
Ignacio De La Fuente: 9,600 (36%)
Nancy Nadel: 3,948 (14.8%)

Those numbers are really interesting. Since there's really nothing more to go by...allow me to point up what I find suggestive here.

Nadel voters knew going in that Nancy had little chance to win...so her strong showing is really significant. Further, Dellums holds 44% even with Nadel at 15%. That means that 59% of Oakland primary voters rejected the endorsements of papers and politicians and voted either of two PROGRESSIVE candidates. That indicates a strong showing for "progressive" and "anti-busines as usual" voters in Oakland today.

Assuming these numbers hold up, this does not seem to bode well for De La Fuente either. Nadel / Dellums voters certainly overlap more than Nadel / De La Fuente voters. (Of course, I could be wrong about that.) De La Fuente's best hope, I've always thought, would be to win it tonight either outright or by a solid percentage. And while he may yet do so when the votes are counted, I just don't see De La Fuente convincing a majority of Nancy Nadel voters to vote his way in a run off.

Further, these numbers make me think that the "mystery robo-calls" may have hurt Dellums enough to stop him from winning outright, and that they also, paradoxically, may have both unintentionally led voters to Nancy Nadel as a principled alternative and done nothing to help De La Fuente who was certainly the intended benificiary. (Of course, if these are absentee results, they may reflect votes cast BEFORE the robocalls...argh.) My bet, however, is that time will prove that the robocalls backfired, and may have pushed some voters to Nadel.


Post a Comment

<< Home