6 thoughts on “Taylor to Face Nirenberg in June 10 Runoff

  1. Lots of research on ballot listing. Link below. Interesting topic. Doubtful it was an issue here, especially considering the low-turnout. Point 8 in the link would favor Nirenberg, but others would favor Taylor. It seems to be a wash. Considering that the turn-out was so low, voters who did vote were highly motivated and no doubt had their candidate clearly in mind. I’m sure ballot listing was a non-issue.

    She appears very untrustworthy and doesn’t present well at all. Not a strong candidate. Tepid mayor, at best, made to look passable by a scorching hot economy in an up-and-coming city. That Nirenberg guy looks like the real deal: strong, honest vision. That’s my hot take.

    Decent little blog you have here. Thanks. Keep it up.

    Ballot listing link: http://www.centerforpolitics.org/newslet_909cb.html

    • Thanks for providing this ballot analysis by the University of Virginia’s Larry Sabato, a highly respected expert on the subject of elections and politics. I think you meant to highlight Point 9, which I am sure is valid. What Sabato does not address, however, is how the ballot is presented to voters. A crowded ballot with an uninterrupted list of all candidates might give equal weight to the first and last candidates, but what about an interrupted ballot where voters have to go to a second electronic screen to see all candidates?

      Add to that the user experience. The voting screens do not respond to touch the way a smart phone screen works. The voter has to hold a finger on the screen longer to get the selection to register, which might explain some of the undercount. And surely some of the less informed voters saw 11 names for mayor on the first screen and assumed those were the choices. They voted and then went to the next screen and probably were met with momentary confusion. Many, perhaps, scrolled back to undo their vote, some with the help of a poll worker. But it’s easy to see how some failed to correct their vote or simply gave up. Nearly 1,000 people in the city who voted did not vote for mayor. I find that odd. –RR

  2. Yeah, the user experience was awful. I’ll second that. I read Taylor’s comments as an admission of under-performance and then a reason for that under performance. Was ballot placement the reason 58% didn’t vote for her? Personally, I don’t think so and even going down an endless rabbit hole of scenarios doesn’t change that. We’ll see, though. You media folks got yourselves a race, that’s for sure.

  3. Where I voted early, the election staff verbally informed voters that there were two pages of mayoral candidates. Nirenburgn was not even listed on the ballot/machine where my Husband cast his early vote. Taylor should put on her big girl panties and stop whining.

  4. You might want to correct the runoff candidates for place 6 in the list/table: Havrda – not Treviño – came in second.

  5. Yes, went to he study posted-interesting. I guess number of candidates that are on ballot can be an issue. Should we consider City Charter amendment to address “viable ” candidates on ballot?
    Any way, glad to see some else recognized the under votes, District 8 ( my council district) had the highest number of under votes. Hopefully, this bodes well for Candidate Brehm. I determined my selection by attending debate forums and observing which candidate demonstrated traits that indicate capability to work well in a small group.
    Lastly, I hope Cabello-Havrda is elected. I attended candidate debate at Luby’s and one stated “Union Man” and other enjoyed reading.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *