My vote count is up to 5684. I don't know, I think that's cool. I am 600 votes behind the lowest vote-getting winner, and about 1300 votes above the next person behind me. So why am I clustered near the winners but the next person is so far behind? It raises questions about the value of endorsements and the effort those who endorse you put into your election. I got more endorsements than Janet Flint (the person next in order), and among a couple groups that did GOTV efforts. On the other hand, I got an endorsement from a group that did a mailer only, and while Janet didn't get that endorsement (due to somewhat confusing rules about when your questionnaire had to be turned in), I don't think the mailers had much to do with me getting more votes. Because our slate, of which Janet was a part, did a mailer to nearly 30,000 voters, plus we distributed another 8,000 by hand. All this elliptical thinking (which I am doing in my head and not in this post) suggest a couple campaign truisms:
1. Going door to door to door is the best way to win votes. This trumps mailers and endorsements, which (see below) reinforce the voter contact.
2. Otherwise, people need to see your name seven times to remember it well enough to vote for you.
Its all very interesting to me. Among other questions it raises, I wonder, how do political scientists dare call them scientists? There's basically no way to do a peer reviewed, double-blind election.
1 comment:
More people voted for you in Alameda County than voted for Tony Thurmond.
Post a Comment