Friday, May 11, 2007

Johnson praises Council District 5's animated voters

Councilwoman Marcia Johnson thanked her supporters today in her "News from District 5" newsletter, and congratulate so many of them for voting.
I also want to applaud District 5 voters for turning out in droves! Our district boasted the second highest voter turn-out in the city - 9,336 out of the 80,536 total votes cast.
What are the facts here?

In 2003, District 5 had nearly 12,700 voters. Thus, turnout for 2007 wasn't even 75% of the 2003 mark. More than 3,300 prior voters were missing from the polls.

So we can't call this a stirring victory for democracy, or laud District 5 for the highest vote percentages in the city (Council Districts 7 and 8 held that distinction). But it's a pretty good indicator of animated voters.

Perhaps they didn't know that a Council incumbent hasn't lost in Denver for 20 years, or thought that this might be a close race... especially given the 2003 runoff election, in which Johnson squeaked by with just 46 more votes than her opponent.

During that runoff, Johnson received 6,371 votes. In 2007, she won the support of 7,149 voters. So the safest thing that can be said is that she has picked up the support of 778 voters over the course of her term... and, of course, continued the streak of unbeaten Denver incumbents for another election cycle.

2 comments:

Ben said...

Dave, I think you nit pick too much. When I asked Darrel Watson's campaign manager about your post about him she said you couldn't have been further off base. As far as Marcia's district, we did have the second highest turnout in the city. It's an accomplishment considering that she was a shoe-in. I encourage you not to disparage every statistic and fact that comes out. Also, I encourage you to ramp up your coverage of the run-off elections. I'd bet all the remaining candidates would be willing to submit to an interview.

Best,

Ben

Dave Burrell said...

If there's something that I have said that is inaccurate in any of these posts, I am happy to correct it.

Is there something incorrect here?

I don't disagree that District 5 had the second-highest turnout (nor did I above), but that's not saying much, unless you put it in perspective - which is what I tried to do.

As far as the Watson cry that I "couldn't have been further off base" regarding their ugly campaign tactics, I'd need to know what's wrong to accept any blame. Did their press releases truly and accurately represent the financial numbers? Was the blogger who went on a two-week bender against the Madison not a friend of the campaign? Did Watson's campaign workers not attack opponents in unscrupulous ways, as described by the Madison campaign manager at the time?

I don't make the facts up, but I do get the liberty of speaking freely about the ugly things that have been reported throughout the blogosphere (e.g., Dear Denver, Denver Direct, Westword, ColeNeighborhood.org, etc). It was only in the consolidation of all these facts and allegations that made the Watson campaign look so bad.

I will take your suggestion of not disparaging facts and statistics, and if candidates want to speak in an open forum, I'm happy to provide it. As for interviewing, I know I'm not a journalist, so I'll have to leave that to others.