Power Line News

At work a black female was overheard saying “I am glad we won”.  I wonder if she voted; I think I’ll ask her.

I am looking at the Chicago numbers for the election results right now and will really have to compare them to prior year elections.

I am looking at only the voter counts right now and still am hunting around for the turnout statistics.

In Chicago there are 50 wards which are then broken down into precincts from there.

Now Chicago is a diverse city with some areas obviously that are heavily Black for example.  But even at that with a ward having say 12 to 15 precincts within it you expect to see some variations at the precinct level.

Few places even there are monolithic black.  There are many other ethinic groups represented.  They may be in very minor amounts but they do still exist.

The turnouts may have been lower than expected but the results would almost make Saddam proud.

I am seeing princicts with 99.7% of the vote going to BHO.

At the ward level you see from 99% plus to 55% with a few mid 70s to 80s.

Even random votings no matter how popular a person is nationally you don’t expect to see numbers in a set of precincts that compose a ward with numbers like 590 to 2 for the votes cast.

Other cities I have looked at with large Black voter populations voted heavy for BHO at the precinct level but there still were greater numbers of votes for Mc which I would have to believe were PUMA type votes against BHO. 

Scanning through I am finding precincts in Chicago that went 100% BHO..not even a vote for any of the third party candidates like McKinney.

I will have to go back to things like other presidential elections and maybe even the voter breakdown for the election of Harold Washington but when I start comparing the ratios to other similar racial distribution precincts in other major cities some conclusions will appear but right now this is still a very unsettling set of data to me.

Of the 50 wards that make up Chicago there were 6 wards where Mc got less than 1% of the vote.  There are more where he gets less than 2%.  City wide he turns about 13%.

Those kind of voting numbers are almost surreal.

Just looked at Kerry/Bush the lowest ward number for Bush was 2.26% of the vote and he picked up 18.21 city wide.

There are only a couple wards in the under 5% group.

The almost total exclusion of non BHO votes does raise alarms.

Even in the Kerry Bush race I am seeing voter percentages for 3rd party candidates gaining more than Mc did in some wards.

I just don’t readily accept a vote that lopsided no matter how popular the guy is.

nanosecondinvestments - 18 November 2008 06:20 AM

I just don’t readily accept a vote that lopsided no matter how popular the guy is.

This sounds as though it is going to be interesting.

nanosecondinvestments - 18 November 2008 06:20 AM

I just don’t readily accept a vote that lopsided no matter how popular the guy is.

This sounds as though it is going to be interesting.

nanosecondinvestments - 18 November 2008 06:20 AM

I just don’t readily accept a vote that lopsided no matter how popular the guy is.

This sounds as though it is going to be interesting.

Now look at the over all trends here

Total voters (some small amount 3rd party) City wide but many of the Black precincts were down in voter totals for their ward and precincts

2000 955261
2004 1032878
2008 1076610

2000 Bush 163610/17.3% Gore 765541/80.14%
2004 Bush 188056/18.21% Kerry 839496/81.28%
2008 McCain 147532/13.7% Obama 919447/85.40%

Note even in the 2nd Bush term he drew more votes than his first

I will be making up a spreadsheet on this but with Kerry and Gore nearly the same on percentages even with Bush supposedly more disliked in this blue blue state the numbers really don’t pass the smell test

Apparently ...

There is something to that black backlash: “He aint black enough” OR “He aint from the hood”.  Just exactly what DOES Obambi have in common with “the black community”?  The ability to change shades depending on his audience?

.

Some lopsided results

Ward 3 contains 50 precincts in the ward
There were 42 precints where Mc was in the single digits for votes
There were 5 of those where he did not recieve a single vote nada zip

Ward 4 with 52 precincts

27 single digits 2 with no votes for him

Ward 5 with 55 precincts (need to check but I think this is BHO/Ayers/Farakhan ward they live in)

39 single digits 5 with no votes 86 votes for 3rd party total
23924 votes cast 23241 BHO 540 Mc
even within this ward there were precincts where Mc got near 10% of the vote and a ward doesn’t change that much from precinct to precinct 3 precincts gave BHO 100% of the vote zero 3rd party even

21 precincts were 99% or higher BHO votes

Ward 6 with 64 precints Mc did not get double digit votes in any of them 5 of them he got none

3 princincts BHO took every vote cast only 14 precincts had less than 99% of the vote for BHO so 50 gave him 99% or more

28763 votes 28549 BHO 168 Mc 46 3rd party

I will put it all together later but there were multiple wards where Mc got near or under 1/2 of 1% or .5% of the vote.

I don’t buy into that kind of monolithic block voting

Just comparing ward 6 which was the one BHO dominated the most

2000 Bush/Gore

24647 votes Bush 433/1.76% Gore 24071/97.66% even Nader picked up 100 votes

2004 Bush/Kerry

27325 votes Bush 728/2.66% Kerry 26549/97.16%
only .42% for 3rd parties

2008 Mc/BHO

28763 votes Mc 168/0.58% BHO 28549/99.26% only 34 votes total 3rd party/0.07%

Edit

Actually there was another ward even more lopsided

Ward 17

23633 votes Mc 95/0.40% BHO 23490/99.39% .06% 3rd party

nanosecondinvestments - 18 November 2008 10:52 AM

Some lopsided results

Ward 3 contains 50 precincts in the ward
There were 42 precints where Mc was in the single digits for votes
There were 5 of those where he did not recieve a single vote nada zip

Ward 4 with 52 precincts

27 single digits 2 with no votes for him

Ward 5 with 55 precincts (need to check but I think this is BHO/Ayers/Farakhan ward they live in)

39 single digits 5 with no votes 86 votes for 3rd party total
23924 votes cast 23241 BHO 540 Mc
even within this ward there were precincts where Mc got near 10% of the vote and a ward doesn’t change that much from precinct to precinct 3 precincts gave BHO 100% of the vote zero 3rd party even

21 precincts were 99% or higher BHO votes

Ward 6 with 64 precints Mc did not get double digit votes in any of them 5 of them he got none

3 princincts BHO took every vote cast only 14 precincts had less than 99% of the vote for BHO so 50 gave him 99% or more

28763 votes 28549 BHO 168 Mc 46 3rd party

I will put it all together later but there were multiple wards where Mc got near or under 1/2 of 1% or .5% of the vote.

I don’t buy into that kind of monolithic block voting

Come on Nano, Saddam was always getting 100% of his country’s votes, Why do you think the “o"ne couldn’t pull it off? .......

Rocketman ~(Ä)~ - 18 November 2008 10:43 AM

Apparently ...

There is something to that black backlash: “He aint black enough” OR “He aint from the hood”.  Just exactly what DOES Obambi have in common with “the black community”?  The ability to change shades depending on his audience?



.

Always thought there were black middle class and mature (probably elder) blacks that saw him more personally snake oil than whites.

Charles Oakwood - 18 November 2008 02:26 PM

Rocketman ~(Ä)~ - 18 November 2008 10:43 AM

Apparently ...

There is something to that black backlash: “He aint black enough” OR “He aint from the hood”.  Just exactly what DOES Obambi have in common with “the black community”?  The ability to change shades depending on his audience?



.

Always thought there were black middle class and mature (probably elder) blacks that saw him more personally snake oil than whites.

In his race against Bobby Rush he lost big and ugly and part of the deal was that he wasn’t ‘black enough’ since he had not been a raidical like Rush who was a cofounder of the state Black Panters or any of the major civil rights figures.  Guess he is the ‘new black’.

Many of the wards there have been fairly solid in their votes ever since they were banded together to elect Harol Washington to mayor.

But when you see places Bush did even better the second time around and Mc pics up only 1/4 of that vote count and third party votes are almost non existent you have to wonder if perhaps ‘pre screening’ of voters was being done outside the precinct.

The PUMAs had reports of Black Panther types , just like in Philly, who during the primary were turning away little old black ladies who were Hill supporters and telling them no Hill votes were being accepted today.  That was in Lake County Indiana which is in the very NW corner of the state and is almost a suburb of Chicago.

As I said precincts even tend not to be pure black only.  There is a mix of latino and other ethinic groups thrown in to the mix.

I will have to see if I can find a ward/precinct map for Chicago , but when I see Mc get almost 10% in one precinct in a ward and several more with 5 or 6 % and then the other down to 1 or 2 votes I say that variation is way to much for a free election.  Especially with so many precincts within a ward.

Sure I can see lots of party line 80% plus cases but when you get whole wards going 95% plus with over 40 precincts in the ward flags start flying.

Remember the original post in this thread said total black ward turnout was down not up.

With percentage hitting the high stops you would expect that voter registration drives and gotv stuff would have kicked the turnout totals to new records.

With these lopsided results but lower turnout you almost have to suspect voters being turned away who might vote against BHO or warnings in the neighborhood not to show up or votes being ‘lost’ out of the ballot box.

For a bit of scale Cook County Ill which contains Chicago has a population of about 5 million with a voting age population of about 4 million. However in Chicago about 1.5 million people were registered to vote.

According to the Census the population is 26% Black.

Even from the primary voter registration jumped which should have increased the total turnout.

http://www.chicagoelections.com/dm/news_releases/document_236.pdf

A total of 1,485,352 Chicagoans are registered to vote for the upcoming Nov. 4, 2008 Presidential
General Election, an increase of 177,833 (13.60%) in the eight months since the Primary Election and the highest registration total for a presidential election since 1992.

Chicago Election Board Chairman Langdon D. Neal said the net increase in voters is most noteworthy because 83,360 (more than two-fifths) of the increase came only in the final week before
the Oct. 7 registration deadline.

“This last-minute crush of registrations was nothing short of monumental. Chicago voters gave new meaning to the expression ‘better late than never,’” Neal said. “In all, we handled more than 100,000 forms and letters from that final week, because we also had more than 30,000 voters change and update their records.”

“Anyone who was in this building saw there was no central political organization behind this. This was the sheer will of individuals, mostly young adults, who were determined to be ready to cast their ballots in the upcoming presidential election.”

Chicago has pretty strong block voting in the black community but that alone doesn’t explain what I am seeing.

Massive voter registration but Black precincts turnout is down from prior elections and Dem candidate get 97% plus of the vote.

Even in the heavy Black districts there has never been this scale of lop sided voting and I am heavy into building the spreadsheets right now.

It is just like somebody said only BHO voters can come to the precincts in Black places and 2 or 3 accidentally or on purpose voted for Mc out of 4 or 500 in the precinct.

It is so far off from past stuff and the BHO effect alone doesn’t cut it for justification.

Registration up you expect turnout and total votes up with about the same percentages but this did not match that profile.

Ok I just uploaded the Chicago voting spread sheets to google, but note that Chicago is still counting last minute votes like absentee votes and provisional ballots so their figures a slightly higher than these are.

I will update the sheets when they finalize their numbers but this is to illustrate the lopsided voting done there.

I had to split it into two sheets due to size limitations on Google

Ward 1 through 25 (the more interesting set)

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=py9VmOV0zfQGCn0sfkDXcPg

Ward 26 though 50

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=py9VmOV0zfQEJWDieI7ekGQ