The absentee and provisionals are in for today -- in the District 6 election! This week's episode: Everybody Hates It When We Do A Numbers Post.
Hey, the YouTube footage of Chris Daly's victory speech is up! See above. (Warning: It's about 15 minutes long. Plus, some R-rated language) You'll have to click after the jump to find partial footage of Sarah's (we gotta have something to make you keep reading.)
---
So the updated numbers for the ballot count in District 6 are in (the counts are reprinted after the jump so you can check our math). Here's what we've calculated (everyone, check our math).
As of today, the total votes in the district are 13,024. Daly has 6313 (48.47%) and Black has 5191 (39.86%). On election night, the total vote count was 11,018, Daly had 5471 votes (49.66%) and Black had 4312 (39.14%).
So this latest round of voting added 2006 votes (13,024-11,018). Daly gained 842 votes and Black gained 879. So Black got 43.8% of the new votes and Daly gained 42.0% -- meaning Black had an advantage of 1.8% in the same-day absentees and provisionals. The new difference between Daly and Black's votes is 1122 votes.
To win, Daly has to get 6513 votes (13,024 divided by 2, plus 1). That means he needs to pick up 200 more votes (6513-6313) in the RCV runoff.
So how's the RCV runoff going to work? Sooooo -- the bottom candidate (Robert Jordan) will be tossed out and the 89 ballots that had him listed in first place will then have their second-place votes redistributed. If after that, no one has a clear majority, they'll redistribute the votes of the next last place person.
Let's say that person is George Dias (who currently has 173 votes). So they take all the ballots listing George Dias as a top choice and redistribute those votes to the next person they have listed. At this point, if you voted for Jordan first and Dias second, they'll go to your third ranked choice for the second redistribution.
The next run is where the dreaded "exhausted ballot" comes into play. If Daly hasn't picked up 200 votes by the end of run 2, then we'll explain what happens at that point in our next post.
So the magic number for Daly for now is 200. (For ease of calculation from here on out, we're assuming that all the absentees and provisionals have been counted. If it turns out there are more still outstanding, we'll wait for the revised count and we'll update these numbers at that point.)
Okay, enough with the blah blah blah. Onto the Sarah Daly video!
YouTube clips by user d6politics.
partial video only! (3:07). Look at the brief look of panic that flashes in Chris's eyes as Sarah revs up! (2:15-2:33)
---
To check our math, here's the numbers from the sfgov.org site. We've also included the first count of the pre-election day absentees so you can run any numbers you want yourself from this post. Feel free to post your calculations in the comments!
As of 3:23 p.m. today, 11/9.
CHRIS DALY . . . . . . . . . . 6,313 48.47
ROB BLACK . . . . . . . . . . 5,191 39.86
MATT DRAKE . . . . . . . . . . 487 3.74
VILIAM DUGOVIC. . . . . . . . . 269 2.07
DAVY JONES . . . . . . . . . . 268 2.06
MANUEL JIMENEZ, JR. . . . . . . . 234 1.80
GEORGE DIAS. . . . . . . . . . 173 1.33
ROBERT JORDAN . . . . . . . . . 89 .68
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 0
Tally at the end of election night
MEMBER, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST. 6
VOTE FOR 1
CHRIS DALY.................................................5,471 49.66
ROB BLACK...................................................4,312 39.14
MATT DRAKE...................................................378 3.43
VILIAM DUGOVIC..............................................235 2.13
DAVY JONES....................................................216 1.96
MANUEL JIMENEZ, JR.........................................189 1.72
GEORGE DIAS...................................................142 1.29
ROBERT JORDAN.................................................75 .68
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 0
The 9:00 p.m. election night initial total (pre-election day absentees)
VOTE FOR 1 (9:00 p.m.)
ROB BLACK . . . . . . . . . . 784 43.97
CHRIS DALY . . . . . . . . . . 700 39.26
MATT DRAKE . . . . . . . . . 87 4.88
DAVY JONES . . . . . . . . . . 58 3.25
VILIAM DUGOVIC. . . . . . . . . 57 3.20
MANUEL JIMENEZ, JR. . . . . . . . 57 3.20
GEORGE DIAS. . . . . . . . . . 27 1.51
ROBERT JORDAN . . . . . . . . . 13 .73
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 0
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
Hi Rita, that's a dead link to the Chris Daly victory speech video. Youtube has the updated link.
Fuck you indeed. I wonder what exactly was making Sarah cry? Was it the victory? Was it the cruelty of the Black campaign? Was it the stress of the campaign in general? I'd like it if SFist would interview her to get the answer.
yikes! YouTube is still loading the updated Chris speech, I'll fix the link as soon as it goes back up. Sorry, I was busy trying to figure out how all those numbers worked!
Update: Okay, it's fixed. Click away.
Okay, more numbers!
Your non-Black, non-Daly protest voters currently total 1520, or 11.7% of the vote count.
15% of Black's vote came in pre-election absentees. 11% of Daly's did, and 17.9% of Drake's.
Two initial thoughts:
All of the other candidates and those who voted for them, should spend the next 4 years in shame. The very idea that a Viliam Dugovic -- barely able to communicate in English and clearly without any kind of grasp of the issues -- should think that he's qualified to represent 70,000 San Franciscans, is farcical and tragic. While I have nothing against say, Manuel Jiminez, the fact that he and the others stayed in the race was totally a matter of ego and obstinance. They knew they couldn't win, but they managed to siphon votes away from the two main contenders, which is especially ironic since they all touted themselves as alternatives to Daly. Instead, they merely diverted 1,520 votes from Daly's only viable challenger, thus keeping Daly in power. I asked a guy on Tuesday who he was going to vote for. "I'm Republican; I'm voting for Matt Drake", he said. Imbecilic.
Second, Daly got fewer votes per-capita this time than in the last two elections. Also, he spent far more money this time to do so. And, as IRV second and third-choices get tallied, we're going to see that total erode even further. I wonder if the fact that fewer people voted fro him this time (and so few approve of his job performance) matters to him? Oh wait -- of course not; Daly wears his lack of approval as a badge of distinction.
Looking at the department of elections website, it looks like both District 4 and District 6 had supervisor races with less than 50% of the votes went to one candidate.
When do we find out who will represent these two districts?
"The next run is where the dreaded "exhausted ballot" comes into play."
FYI. You can have 'exhausted ballots" after the the first candidate is eliminated. For example, if folks who picked Robert Jordan as their first choice don't have a second or third, there ballot will be 'exhausted'.
Okay, you know we don't usually seed the comments, but a Daly-supporting mathematician we know just sent over an algebraic proof of how RCV is supposed to work with exhausted ballots. Let's see if we can type this out right.
Okay. Let x = number of votes Daly gains,
and let y = the number of exhausted ballots (a ballot where all of the voter's choices have been eliminated. When a ballot is exhausted, it drops out of the total voter count for RCV purposes.)
so:
6313 + x [Daly's current vote total plus any votes he gets = Daly's total votes]
has to be greater than
13024 - y [the total votes minus the exhausted ballots], divided by 2 (divide by 2 to get 50% of the total vote).
Written mathematically, that's:
6313 + x > [13024-y] / 2
When you work that out, you get:
2x + y > 398
So, for example, if all of Robert Jordan's 89 votes turn out to be exhausted ballots (y), then Daly would need
2x + 89 > 398
2x > 398-89
2x> 309
x> 154.5 (round that up to 155)
155 votes to win.
We'll mechanically apply this formula to all our future coverage of the RCV numbers!
>
As opposed to how many votes a single billionaire and his a$$hole lawyers diverted in the most expensive district election in the history of San Francisco?
TenderNob: Brilliant! If only the other citizens had voted for your guy instead of for the person they actually wanted, your guy would have won. This is a very novel theory of democracy. I shall notify the now-spinning corpse of Thomas Jefferson of your analysis.
This situation is where the genius of ranked-choice voting becomes apparent. Whereas you are just guessing that Jordan voters were casting a protest vote against Daly, we have hard evidence of their second, and third, choices.
"Instead, they merely diverted 1,520 votes from Daly's only viable challenger"
The idea that one big money a$$hole will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to place a 90% tenant district into the pockets of out of town landlord lawyers is morally repugnant.
To do what, evict EVERYBODY IN THE DISTRICT?????
But that has just been business as usual for so long now I guess you were hoping nobody could tell the difference anymore.....
"Brilliant! If only the other citizens had voted for your guy instead of for the person they actually wanted, your guy would have won. This is a very novel theory of democracy. I shall notify the now-spinning corpse of Thomas Jefferson of your analysis."
Good god, some people are clueless.
Look: if everyone was happy with Chris Daly, there would've been no contest and no contestants. But clearly, not everyone was happy with Chris Daly. Some people wanted someone who was less Chris Daly-esque. Does that mean they wanted someone further to the left? Nope; all seven of Daly's contenders were Democrats (despite Drake being endorsed by the Republicans), and ALL of them were to the right of Daly.
So, clearly -- the goal here was to have someone to the Right of Daly, which is precisely where every other candidate was. Given that, there were just two choices: elect someone OTHER than Daly, or make a "protest vote" that ensured that Daly retained his position as Supe.
The ONLY rival to Daly who had a ghost of a chance of winning for at least the past month was Rob Black. Ergo: if anyone out there wanted a non-Daly, they had to vote for Black. Sorry kiddies, but that's the reality. I never said that people weren't free to vote for whomever they wanted. I said that if people were fed up with Daly and actually wanted to have their vote be part of a process of change, they only had Black as a viable alternative to Daly.
It boils down to this: you can't win an election on a message of contempt for the people and neighborhoods you're offering to represent.
actually, nobby, rob black was NOT a viable alternative to daly.
because ... he lost.
that's how viable alternatives are measured on election day.
TenderNob,
You illustrate exactly the gernius of ranked-choice voting. Assuming they are voting "anyone but Daly", they can vote for, say, Manuel Jimenez with their first vote, because they like his videos, or whatever, and still have another vote to use for Rob Black.
So you are totally off-base when you criticize Manuel and crew for running. If the people who voted for them can stand Rob Black (not a certainty, by any means), their vote will still count for him.
I advise getting the facts right before you post.
when was the last time feinstein backed a republican???
you people are clueless
just because you don't prioritize making sure people can stay on the dole until they die doesn't make you a republican you dumb fucks!!!
ps we should know the results of the rvc runoff at 8am this morning
yeah the most expensive district election in san francisco history because one extremely wealthy citizen wanted to hand a 90% tenant district over to a former attorney of the most notorious landlord lawfirm in the state.
How many votes were you able to buy for all that money?
Oh and if you thought your landlord loving non-viable candidate could ever slip into a district composed of 90% tenants then you are the 'dumbfuck'....
"when was the last time feinstein backed a republican???"
How about day before yesterday when she endorsed a candidate heavily financied by SFSOS.....
You would think that renters would like to have a renter represent them, instead of a college dropout who's mother bought him a condo.
I am not going to support a scheming weasel like Rob Black, who worked for the worse landlord law firm in the state and never a single time mentioned the word 'tenant' on his website.
Daly has been one of the most solid tenant votes on the BOS.
Clearly, if you cannot afford an $800,000 condo in SF then Rob Black's solution is for you to just leave.
Thank you smushmoth. Enough of this so-called pro-tenant stuff already! Daly is a trust fund baby and this must never be forgotten.
If you go to this link you can listen to the SFBG interview of Rob Black, where the candidate displays near total ignorance of tenant issues and expresses dismay and alarm that new TIC purchasers face imminent interest rate increases on their risky ARM loans.
http://www.sfbg.com/entry.php?page=2&entry_id=1693&catid=&volume_id=254&issue_id=256&volume_num=41&issue_num=02
The retarded candidate and his retarded mayor scramble to protect the retarded bag holders of our TIC bubble.....
Why should the 90% of the district that are tenants suffer because a handful of sheep were conned into a risky ownership structure with risky financial structure and risky market conditions?
If you were stupid enough to buy a TIC, especially within the last year or two, with an adjustable rate mortgate dont you deserve whatever is going to happen to you????
Why does Black feel so much deep sympathy for this pathetic group of morons? Why is he so intent on protecting their bad business decisions? Why doesn't he sue the conmen who fleeced his TIC friends????? Why does he attact tenants?
Maybe it is because he doesn't really care the TIC morons or the tenants. Maybe its because he worked for a big landlord law firm with big landlord clients and this was just another attempt to take over the entire city to make it a fantastic playground for the ultra rich, and everybody else just kindly get the hell out?????
ro, you bring up an interesting point. you are middle class in this town when you can only afford an 800k condo. black wanted to represent that middle class. daly does not and will not. looks like we are headed for 4 more years of potential class warfare here in D6 which is sad since our candidate was willing to represent everyone, not just you bourgeois fucks.
i do have to say congrats and hats off to the folks that got out the vote, regardless of how they voted or how you got them to the polls. it was an admirable effort all around.
i am frustrated that so many of my shitbag neighbors here in south beach didn't bother to vote, again!!!
they deserve the lack of representation we will get for another 4 years.
whatever!!!
so if daly's campaign spent & raised more money than in 2002, which equated (thus far) to less votes in 2006 even with a higher voter count, how many votes did that buy him?
hopefully, enough to make that treasure island real estate developer happy and we all know how pro-tenant those folks are.
what do you daly folk think of this letter to the editor today in the examiner?
Daly’s victory
If this was the election year 2002, and Supervisor Chris Daly received the same number of votes as he did in this 2006 election, he would have lost by 834 votes to the ABCD campaign, Anybody But Chris Daly. Therefore, Daly is either the luckiest politician in the world, or his inane antics over the next four years will thankfully lead all San Franciscans to only one conclusion: That district elections must be immediately abolished before anyone else with only 1.3 percent of the citywide, registered, vote gets to divvy up a five billion-dollar budget however they and their political hacks see fit.
Peter Streitz
The City
"ro, you bring up an interesting point. you are middle class in this town when you can only afford an 800k condo. black wanted to represent that middle class. daly does not and will not."
ha ha ha.
Yeah you just said something we can agree on. Some people think an $800,000 condo makes you middle class, and I guess gives you the right to illegally purchase an election and drive everyone else out of town.
" looks like we are headed for 4 more years of potential class warfare here in D6 which is sad since our candidate was willing to represent everyone, not just you bourgeois fucks."
I'm sorry about your south beach neighbors terrible business decisions and lack of judgement but if they are too stupid to avoid ARM mortgate scams what makes you think they are smart enough to steal elections? Darwin at work.
Even your semi-literate mayor said "The only person who thought Rob Black could win was Rob Black."
First of all the Guardian has a complete lack of credibility when it comes to this race. They put Daly on the cover. They put an endorsement of Alix Rosenthal right on the cover, and the disclosure of the fact that she was the domestic partner of their editor was found pages later in much smaller print (how many people read that second part?).
As for TIC/Condo conversion, Daly was able to buy a condo at a city legislated Below Market Rate. Yet he had a trust fund and a huge low interest loan from his mother to make the down payment. Those BMR condos are meant to allow teachers/firemen/artists/police/etc to get a chance for home ownership. Instead that condo went to a trustifarian, who immediately thereafter received more than 100% pay raise (37k to 88k). Every thing Daly has done since then to block TIC/Condo conversion has had the effect of driving up the value of his own Condo. That would be fine if he was pushing harder to get new properties built in his district or citywide. But he blocks those too, at least until the developer puts money into his pet non-profits. Where the money goes from there is unknown at this time. But the chair to the recipients committee made sure that she endorsed Daly. If you want rents to go down in San Francisco the place to start is change rent control so that only those who really should be the protected class should have their rents protected.
Most everyone I have met who supported Daly with such fervor come from the same stock as him. College educated children of the upper middle class or upper class "slumming" for a while knowing full well that their own kid's college tuition will be paid for by their parents, grandparents or inheritance. They already have their's why should they want anyone else to have that sort of security?
I keep reading about how Black worked for some "republican" law firm, lets make sure you list everyone that firm represented during the period that Black worked for them. This is the same crap that Bush pulled with WMD's in Iraq, all the evidence that they existed was front and center, all the evidence that they didn't was hidden. (The SF Bay Guardian/Fox News/Rush Limbaugh does this all the time, it is a common trick of the dogmatic) At the same time we should make sure that we should use the same fine toothed comb for all candidates.
rob tells me we'll hear the total rvc at 4pm today.
wait a sec, did i take a wrong turn? is this sfist or the freaking wall? christ people, can we take down a notch or two?
saying that daly blocks development is absurd. there's 10,000 new housing units being built in D6. it's an area where he's really balanced the wants of the haves and the needs of the have-nots: he's allowed million dollar condos to be built, but balanced that by increasing the affordable housing requirements and creating the rincon hill community stabilization fund. and saying the money will go to daly's "pet non-profits" is more of a baseless smear than saying black worked for a republican law firm.
i've supported all of the efforts to limit TIC-to-condo conversions, but i don't think TICs should be universally demonized. i recognize that they are one of the few ways for middle-class san franciscans to become home owners. but we need to limit condo conversions to lessen the incentive to convert rental housing to TICs.
i'm not opposed to reforming rent control, but i don't know enough about it to say. check out D-2 write-in candidate, david kiddoo, to see a non-profit housing developer's take. he has the most detailed and innovating housing policy of any candidate in this election.
tune into the election results tonight to see how Kiddoo, a last-minute, grassroots, write-in candidate, did with a budget under $1000.
Why does Rob Black think he can win an election by convincing tenants to insure the bad business decisions of his wealthy TIC constituents?
As a rule of thumb, each exhausted ballot can be thought of as 1/2 a vote for Daly and 1/2 a vote for Black. For instance, if Daly needs x RCV votes to win, and the first 2x ballots are exhausted, then he would win.
Siesta, that is very elegant! You've inspired us to calculate Rob Black's RCV-winning formula, which is.....
2x + y > 2642 (where x = RCV votes for Black and y = exhausted ballots)
So, for example, if all of Jordan's 89 ballots are exhausted, Black would need 1277 votes to win.
If no one puts Rob Black down as a second choice, he would need 2643 ballots to be otherwise exhausted to win. There are only 1520 exhaustible ballots out there in this race.
In that same scenario for Daly, even if no one votes for him as a second or third round choice, Chris Daly would need 399 exhausted ballots to win.
And if everybody puts Rob Black down as a second or third choice, we would have to run all the way through to Matt Drake's voters for him to win.
Daly's pet non-profits
http://www.sfweekly.com/Issues/2005-08-31/news/smith_full.html
Extrapolating from the data,
Matt Drake voters that put Drake first, then Black second will most likely not have their 2nd choices taken into consideration, as opposed to those who voted for all the other less popular candidates as their first choice.
Though for Black to actually win, it would have to get down to the Drake votes.
We're guessing Manuel Jimenez voters will re-elect Chris Daly. Any other wagers?
"is more of a baseless smear than saying black worked for a republican law firm."
1. How is it baseless?
2. How is it a smear?
It is a fact. Nowhere on Black's website does he mention the word 'tenant', nowhere in his flyers and publications, nowhere in his interviews or news releases.
His extent of policy for the San Francisco housing crisis is to condo every rental unit in the city, even though it would take the incomes of two firefighters, or two teachers, or two policemen to afford the mortgage and taxes and other expenses of a tiny one bedroom $800,000 apartment.
Why? Because he worked at the worst landlord lawfirm in sacramento. Go to their website.
Google their name. It is a litney of unsavory tacticts and immoral clients....big landlords, the tobacco industry, the pharmacutical industry... I cannot find a single wholesome client anywhere who was represented by Neilsen, Merksamer.
Someone ask me to check Rob Black's client list before I posted. HuuHHH???? Isn't that considered 'priviledged'??.
I invite Rob Black to post his client list while at Nielsen merksamer. I somehow doubt we'll ever know the full extent of the damage he has done to society in general let alone SF tenants.....
ok it is 4pm. I can't wait to see Rob Black cry and cry and cry because I know that if he had won it would be a matter of months probably before my landlord began to cause me no end of stress....