Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
About the same turnout as other off-year elections. The result was way different from from what you claimed would happen.
In my experience a twenty point victory margin is what one would call "decisive."
You are confusing a couple of things. Turnout in a normal DC election where the Democrat is the presumed winner of the general election.....versus....turnout in a DC election where the Democratic nominee is actively contested and the challenger shows a real propensity to put forth a true choice for voters. In the 40 year history of Home Rule, that has not happened. This election truly did hinge on turnout because there was a viable challenger. Unfortunately, the die-hards showed up and the apathetic didn't, even when a viable alternative was there for consideration.
None of the analysts in DC were able to reliably peg Bowser as a shoo in and for good reason.....Bowser was not shoo-in quality and her challenger had more than a tepid response to his candidacy.
You are operating off of hindsight 20/20 instead of a realistic analysis of the circumstances...........there's nothing impressive about that.
You are confusing a couple of things. Turnout in a normal DC election where the Democrat is the presumed winner of the general election.....versus....turnout in a DC election where the Democratic nominee is actively contested and the challenger shows a real propensity to put forth a true choice for voters. In the 40 year history of Home Rule, that has not happened. This election truly did hinge on turnout because there was a viable challenger. Unfortunately, the die-hards showed up and the apathetic didn't, even when a viable alternative was there for consideration.
None of the analysts in DC were able to reliably peg Bowser as a shoo in and for good reason.....Bowser was not shoo-in quality and her challenger had more than a tepid response to his candidacy.
You are operating off of hindsight 20/20 instead of a realistic analysis of the circumstances...........there's nothing impressive about that.
Dude, your candidate lost and your forecasting skills failed.
Exit stage right-wing, find a new crusade, and give the lady a chance.
The voter turnout was actually the highest for a mid-term general election in DC since 1994 (149k/135k/122k/133k/141k/186k). That was the election where Carol Schwartz challenged Marion Barry with 42% of the vote.
I'm a little surprised actually. Even with the population growth, the Bowser/Catania back-and-forth and initiative 71, I didn't think we'd see more than 2010's turnout. Both viable candidates were uncompelling and had critical flaws in my opinion.
The voter turnout was actually the highest for a mid-term general election in DC since 1994 (149k/135k/122k/133k/141k/186k). That was the election where Carol Schwartz challenged Marion Barry with 42% of the vote.
I'm a little surprised actually. Even with the population growth, the Bowser/Catania back-and-forth and initiative 71, I didn't think we'd see more than 2010's turnout. Both viable candidates were uncompelling and had critical flaws in my opinion.
I think the higher turnout....albeit low....was in direct response to the contested nature of the race relative to past races. Bowser benefitted from the die-hards who are holding on to the increasingly fewer threads of the past....where DC was a minority-majority city and black people held considerable political clout. Things are changing fast.....this could very well be the last election where Old DC routs New DC. Ironically, they elected Fenty-In-A-Dress.......the same character they despised 4 short years ago.
You are confusing a couple of things. Turnout in a normal DC election where the Democrat is the presumed winner of the general election.....versus....turnout in a DC election where the Democratic nominee is actively contested and the challenger shows a real propensity to put forth a true choice for voters. In the 40 year history of Home Rule, that has not happened. This election truly did hinge on turnout because there was a viable challenger. Unfortunately, the die-hards showed up and the apathetic didn't, even when a viable alternative was there for consideration.
None of the analysts in DC were able to reliably peg Bowser as a shoo in and for good reason.....Bowser was not shoo-in quality and her challenger had more than a tepid response to his candidacy.
You are operating off of hindsight 20/20 instead of a realistic analysis of the circumstances...........there's nothing impressive about that.
News announcer never predict anything but a competitive election. Everyone who knows anything about elections, knew this one wouldn't be close, but it was actually within 3% of what the reputable polls indicated.
What you predicted is there for all to see. EPIC FAIL
News announcer never predict anything but a competitive election. Everyone who knows anything about elections, knew this one wouldn't be close, but it was actually within 3% of what the reputable polls indicated.
What you predicted is there for all to see. EPIC FAIL
Check my posts....I also hedged my bets knowing the uphill battle Catania had. If you paid attention to what I actually said throughout my many posts on this thread, you would have known that. But instead you play the intellectually dishonest role. I'm not surprised.
I know plenty about DC politics. What I underestimated was the level of apathy in DC, especially in this day and age of gentrification, new young white transplants, and the general notion that Fenty-In-A-Dress would actually be preferrable to those who actually hated Fenty!
Talk about apathy! If what you'r asking me is "Do you realize how apathetic DC truly is?" The answer is "NO!"
I don't understand why you're celebrating...or what you actually have to celebrate about. Do you?
No.... you actually don't know anything about DC politics. What you clearly underestimated was the power of the AA voter in this city. What you also don't understand is that many of the young White voters in this city aren't registered to vote and could care less about local politics because many of them won't be here in the next 4 years. Yes DC has more White people than it did a decade ago but that White population is very transient. Not so much for the city's AA population, we have been here for a couple of Generations and we are truly vested in the city and its future. There was no more voter apathy on Tuesday than usual. I told you that Catania was a weak candidate from the beginning. He never truly had any real citywide support and I posted his election results to prove it. Don't get mad at me because you have poor political instincts. SMFH
I truly could care less about either of them to be honest with you. Bowser is merely the lesser of two evils. In 4 years Kenyon McDuffie will be the new Mayor of Washington, DC and then I'll be excited.
BTW... I know exactly what I'm celebrating. I'm celebrating the fact that a big mouth no-it-all like yourself has to come to grips with the fact that you're not as smart as you think you are. Watching you explain what happened in DC's Mayoral election is just priceless.
I think the higher turnout....albeit low....was in direct response to the contested nature of the race relative to past races. Bowser benefitted from the die-hards who are holding on to the increasingly fewer threads of the past....where DC was a minority-majority city and black people held considerable political clout. Things are changing fast.....this could very well be the last election where Old DC routs New DC. Ironically, they elected Fenty-In-A-Dress.......the same character they despised 4 short years ago.
NEWSFLASH!!!! DC is still Majority-Minority or have you forgotten about the 10% Latino population along with the nearly 50% AA population. I think that's still 60% right??? The die hards you talk about are not as old as you might think. I'm in my late 30's and I like many others plan on being around for quite sometime. Black people still do and will continue to hold political clout in DC for sometime to come. Get used to it!!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What you clearly underestimated was the power of the AA voter in this city. What you also don't understand is that many of the young White voters in this city aren't registered to vote and could care less about local politics because many of them won't be here in the next 4 years. Yes DC has more White people than it did a decade ago but that White population is very transient. Not so much for the city's AA population, we have been here for a couple of Generations and we are truly vested in the city and its future. There was no more voter apathy on Tuesday than usual. I told you that Catania was a weak candidate from the beginning. He never truly had any real citywide support and I posted his election results to prove it. Don't get mad at me because you have poor political instincts. SMFH
