In a phrase, that's what our polls seem
to be saying. Over the past five years, the Columbia Heart Beat online voter
polls -- first of their kind in our town, and now subject to much imitation --
have provided accurate predictions of which candidates and which issues would
come out ahead on Voting Day. Our polls predicted Paul Sturtz's upset Columbia
City Council victory over Almeta Crayton in the First Ward, for instance, and
accurately ranked each of several candidates in order almost down to the
percentage point.
We put polls online months in advance so that over time,
the humps and bumps of online polling inaccuracy start to smoothe out, and
long-term trends emerge. With the exception of the Columbia Mayor's race,
trends for April 6th set up early and held. We also don't get as many people
trying to "beat" the system by voting multiple times because our poll isn't in
their faces every day.
Here's what our polls predict will happen on April 6th
as of today, and why, IMHO.
Will you vote Yes or No for downtown
surveillance cameras?
Votes to date: 721
No -- 54%
Yes -- 39%
Undecided -- 5%
What I've seen and heard: 1) People
don't think crime is a big problem downtown, and no wonder. Before now, the
downtown business community did everything it could to downplay
the issue, even hush-hushing the presence of gangs. 2) Cameras won't deter
determined criminals, so the money and time are better spent on more police.
3) Despite cameras all around, Adam Taylor was attacked in a parking garage,
not on a downtown street, so you can't use his case to justify downtown
cameras. 4) Cameras are a basic intrusion on civil
liberties, and a further erosion of basic American freedoms that are already in
freefall.
Vote (for 1 or 2) Columbia School Board - 3
Yr. Term
Votes to date: 287
Jan Mees -- 64%
Jim Whitt -- 34%
Dan Holt -- 29%
Jim Whitt -- 34%
Dan Holt -- 29%
What I've seen and heard: I've been
impressed with Jan Mees (left) as board member and president. She
always gets back to me quickly and
thoughtfully when I email the board. She was the only school
board candidate to answer my survey. She seems committed and
prepared. I was miffed at Jan for her support of the infamous failed tax levy
and Jan's husband Bill for harshing on Trib reporter Janese Heavin at a
post-election event back then. But I'm over that now. Jan's won my support
and admiration for hanging in and doing a good job in challenging times.
Jim Whitt wins as an incumbent, but Mr.
Whitt and Dan Holt ran lackluster campaigns.
Vote Columbia School Board - 1 Yr.
Term
Votes to date: 337
Jonathan Sessions -- 58%
Phil Peters -- 41%
Phil Peters -- 41%
What I've seen and heard:
Jonathan Sessions (left) has run a better campaign than Phil
Peters has. He's raised a lot of money; he always dresses ultra-sharp;
and he's been visibly working for votes and support. I also think people seek
diversity on certain public platforms, and in this case, Mr. Sessions -- who
would be the youngest board member by far -- brings age diversity to a board
with both ethnic and gender diversity.
One caveat, however -- and I think it's important.
Despite his youth, Mr. Sessions is likely to be a conservative board member,
unlike the change agents Ines Segert, Michelle Gadbois,
or Michelle Pruitt represent. Mr. Peters would probably follow the change agent
path more closely, a philosophy rooted in his experiences with children of lower
socioeconomic status, Head Start, and urban education environments.
Tracy Greever-Rice -- 47%
Daryl Dudley -- 28%
Sarah Read -- 17%
Rick Buford -- 6%
Rick Buford -- 6%
What I've seen and heard: Of all the
City Council candidates to come along in the 4th Ward in years, Tracy Greever-Rice (left) resembles the political, economic, ethical, and
educational face of the 4th Ward majority like few others. Her involvement in
city government -- from service on the Planning and Zoning Commission to
repeatedly sticking her neck out as an unpaid volunteer for her neighborhood
association -- has won her many supporters, as the 4th Ward yard sign wars
attest.
But just as importantly, Mrs. Greever-Rice has run the
best campaign, rallying constituents at small and large gatherings; beating the
streets non-stop; and campaigning on legislative issues. She has a professorial
eye for detail and a razor-sharp mind people first noticed on the Trib's old
Class Notes blog, where after she wrote about the whys and wherefores of the
Phyllis Chase meltdown, posters were clamoring for her to run for School
Board. But City Hall beckoned instead.
The Chamber of Commerce and establishment business
community should have beckoned her opponent, but screwed up by not endorsing
Sarah Read, a small businessperson and attorney who enjoys the
challenge of navigating the thin grey lines that distinguish private from public
ethical considerations.
There's nothing wrong with that. In business, you get the best deal you can, under the circumstances
you're given, and Mrs. Read has made a successful career of conciliating,
mediating, and litigating to do just that. She's a good candidate on these
merits, but voters in our poll must not think Mrs. Read represents the
prevailing 4th Ward ethos as well as Mrs. Greever-Rice does.
City Hall desperately needs to become less of
place to do private business and more of a place to do
the people's business, which gives Mrs. Greever-Rice another decided edge in
this campaign.
Finally, while Everyman and
Everywoman should be able to run for public office in America, stiff competition
can't be ignored. When you have better candidates who do have the
experience in governance, inexperienced contenders aren't as likely to
succeed. In the 4th Ward especially, experience counts, and
neither Daryl Dudley nor Rick Buford seems to
have taken much interest in city government or community service before seeking
the city's highest offices.
Karl Skala -- 57%
Gary Kespohl -- 42%
Gary Kespohl -- 42%
What I've seen and heard: When you're
running against the unpaid, volunteeer legislator -- Karl Skala (left) -- who literally created the concept of coffee house office
hours, which he attends without fail every other Saturday to hear
concerns from anyone -- not just his constitutents -- you'd better be ready to
make your case.
But Mr. Skala's opponent, Gary Kespohl,
has failed to do so in myriad ways. Third Warders I speak to are furious over
what they see as Mr. Kespohl spinning his wheels in mud after failing to get traction on the Landmark Hospital issue, which turned
into a full-fledged political blunder.
Mr. Kespohl has since revved up his monster truck tires to
spin mud blobs at Mr. Skala, few of which go to his legislative record. In
response, Mr. Skala simply drives his campaign car through the car wash,
refusing to engage on anything but substantive issues. In so doing, he
has emerged a genuine statesman.
With his near legendary-preparedness and dedication to
continuing education -- a must in almost any profession -- Mr. Skala has set the
bar of unpaid public service quite high. His consistently high poll numbers
seem to reflect voter recognition of his commitment to their service.
Vote for Columbia
Mayor
Votes to date: 640
Robert McDavid -- 34%
Sid Sullivan -- 30%
Jerry Wade -- 20%
Paul Love -- 9%
Sean O'Day -- 5% (endorsed Sullivan; left race)
Jerry Wade -- 20%
Paul Love -- 9%
Sean O'Day -- 5% (endorsed Sullivan; left race)
What I've seen and heard: The Mayor's
race, with its presumptive leaders and dark horses thrown into flux by the entry
of retired obstetrician/gynecologist Dr. Robert McDavid remains
close, but leaning toward Dr. McDavid (left).
In this race, two candidates who represent different
shades of the establishment -- Dr. McDavid and Jerry Wade --
are vying for votes against one viable non-establishment candidate --
Sid Sullivan.
Until last week, our poll had Mr. Sullivan leading Dr.
McDavid, but that lead faded after Dr. McDavid started advertising in earnest.
With Sean O'Day out of the race after endorsing Mr. Sullivan,
his 5 percent would theoretically put Mr. Sullivan in the lead, but only
slightly.
Mr. Wade might be winning this race hands down had he not
made some potentially fatal political errors. Mr.
Sullivan (left) has been unable to raise much money, but he has used myriad other ways
to keep his name and his ideas in front of voters, including several op-eds that
detail his positions. His tight second now to Dr. McDavid may represent his
ascent in the eyes of former Wade voters.
Dr. McDavid is well-funded and pleasant, attributes that
may be enough to put him over the top. He is a quiet candidate who has been at
home in a quiet campaign.
Paul Love has performed remarkably well
at forums, but he remains an unknown without much visible support seeking the
city's highest office. Tavern owner Sal
Nuccio, while still officially in the race, in reality checked out of
it long ago.
Your poll assumes that Nuccio will get 0 percent of the vote. You know that's not going to happen. Thus, your omission makes your mayor poll virtually worthless.
ReplyDeleteIsn't it Dr. Greever-Rice?
ReplyDeleteAnd, isn't it Dr. Greever-Rice?
ReplyDeleteWhile I did not support him, my bet is that McDavid will win by a much larger margin than you are predicting. He might even make it over the 50% mark. Sullivan will come in third to Jerry Wade, but it is entirely possible that the two of them, combined, will get less of the vote than McDavid.
ReplyDeleteWow, your polls were wrong!
ReplyDeleteWhile the McDavid win doesn't surprise me, the two Ward race election results are very odd.
ReplyDeleteI followed their evolution closely last night, and here's what was going on up until 8:43 pm, when for over an hour Wendy Noren's office stopped reporting results.
At this point, all other counties around us were 100% counted.
In the 4th Ward, Tracy Greever-Rice was averaging 150 votes per precinct to Daryl Dudley's 125 vote average, with 8 of 12 precincts counted. At this point, she had around 1250 votes to Dudley's 1,000 votes.
Then suddenly, for the last 4 precincts, the trend does -- not just a reverse, but a hard 180 -- with Dudley averaging 200 votes per precinct and Greever-Rice 125 votes per precinct, putting him just barely over the top.
In the 3rd Ward, with 6 of 7 precincts counted, Karl Skala leads Gary Kespohl by 60 votes. But that trend, too, does a complete 180 with the last precinct, which puts Kespohl in the lead by 50 votes, giving him a net pickup of 110 votes in a single precinct!
This makes no sense.
Additionally, I wonder what moral authority either man will have to lead their Wards, given the enormous special interest financing and the way the campaigns played out, esp. Kespohl v. Skala, which was one of the most mean-spirited campaigns (on Kespohl and the Chamber's part) I've seen anywhere.
I might also add that in the 4th Ward, Sarah Read remained steady, with about a 110 vote/precinct average across all 12 precincts.
ReplyDeleteIn other words, she provides a logical "benchmark" against which to measure the other percentages.
Why did her per precinct percentage not change much, when the others changed so dramatically?