I'm so glad that somebody picked up on this line I wrote in my last post because I think it's very important:
Message: 11 Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 08:52:39 -0800 (PST) From: Dave Piehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Mpls] City Offices >>Ptrick Peterson wrote: >>(snip) the 2001 elections were not a rejection >>of "Old Minneapolis" as much a series of relatively >>isolated incidences. What are other people's views >>on this issue? David Piehl went on to note that: >>I think there was definately a high level of >>dissatisfaction with the previous city council's >>track record, and large corporate subsidies were >>very high profile at the time, drawing a tremendous >>amount of >>criticism; then there were the scandals. My question is this: did the voters in Minneapolis vote for a "Winds of Change" (WOC) in City Hall (where they wanted, by and large, all the old folks out in favor of new leadership), or was the election of quite a few new council members the result of a series of situations that aren't directly related to each other? Anecdotally, I didn't hear the WOC when I doorknocked. People felt strongly about candidates, and that held up regardless of who they supported. But let's look at the data. Let's assume that for the purposes of argument that RT ran on a Winds of Change platform. That is, he stressed ending corporate subsidies, increasing transparency in city affairs, improving responsivness to the community, etc... (we've all seen the lit). Some city council races broke down in the same way -- the "Old Guard" vs. the candidate preaching WOC. If the Winds of Change message resounded throughout the city, then you'd see him elected. But other candidates who were credible spokespeople on this issue would ALSO be elected -- IF city voters looked at the election as a referendum on the WOC. The data below shows the difference between RT and the WOC city council candidate. In other words, it is the percentage of people who voted "Winds of Change" for mayor and "Old Guard" for city council. Numbers in parentheses mean that more people voted "Winds of Change" for city council and "Old Guard" for mayor W01 -- 36.04% W02 -- n/a -- both preached WOC W03 -- 30.09% W04 -- 38.85% W05 -- (14.09%) W06 -- 6.25% W07 -- 45.54% W08 -- (13.19%) W09 -- n/a W10 -- n/a W11 -- n/a W12 -- 25.34% W13 -- 26.97% According to this analysis, Natalie Johnson Lee and Robert Lilligren both benefited from the Winds of Change -- although one could also argue that Lilligren would probably not have fared so well had Brian Herron not dropped out of the race. Johnson Lee (in my anecdotal opinion and from the data) DID seem to benefit from this phenomenon. But this is only one ward in the entire city. Basically what's going on is that people wanted the Winds of Change for mayor, but they were happy with the Old Guard for their alderman. The evidence seems to suggest that city voters in 2001 did not seek to change the way things were done on a citywide basis, and considered their elections individually rather than as a citywide whole. This refutes the argument that "city voters in minneapolis were seeking change across the board" and supports the statement that voters decided individually whom to vote for based on a seperate set of criteria. That's my longish analysis and why I don't believe that RT and the WOC supporters have a "mandate" in Minneapolis. It could explain why people like Robert Olson also remain popular and are able to outfox RT on a consistent basis. Patrick Peterson (apparantly) with nothing better to do in Dinkytown but re-calculate old election data. ===== __________________ PatrickPeterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] aim:a11235patrick tel:612.379.4722 __________________ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
