Election roundup: Does color matter this year?

By adamg on Thu, 07/11/2013 - 7:55pm

The Herald reports on Charlotte Golar Richie's efforts to round up black and women support as she tries to become Boston's first black and first female mayor (tsk, the Herald left out that she'd also be our first mayor from Brooklyn).

David Bernstein, though, analyzes past election numbers from black precincts and concludes simply being black won't be enough to get out the vote.

Speaking of Bernstein, he argues Larry Harmon in the Globe took a bit of a cheap shot at John Connolly for supporting Charles Yancey's eternal effort to get a Mattapan High School. Although it might not make sense in a year when the school department is reporting lots of empty seats at existing schools, Bernstein notes Connolly wasn't pandering because he's supported the proposal since 2009.

Martin Keogh, running for one of the four at-large council seats, reports he's been endorsed by Ironworkers Local 7, Sheet Metal Workers Local 17 and IBEW Local 2222.

Neighborhoods:

Topics:

Free tagging:

Charlotte Golar Richie

Martin Keogh

Ad:

Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Ms Richie is more than a

By Denise on Thu, 07/11/2013 - 8:37pm.

Ms Richie is more than a minority candidate, she is the only women in the race. Her candidacy will resonate in every ward and precinct in Boston. Her resume speaks volumes.

http://marjoriearonsbarron.com/2013/07/10/charlott...

"As Executive Director of the

By kvn on Fri, 07/12/2013 - 8:41am.

"As Executive Director of the Deval Patrick Committee (DPC),''

That's all I need to know , she'd get my vote for sure, early and often too!

Bernstein needs a statistician

By Kaz on Fri, 07/12/2013 - 9:51am.

It's admirable he'd turn to the numbers instead of just making things up like some political commentators do, but he did little to understand the data...and then draws some conclusions.

He did nothing to show that when black voters went one way or another with their vote for a particular candidate (or no particular candidate at all) that the trend he's examining is any different than white voters, or the entire voting population. He doesn't uncouple the fact that some black voters won't vote race but will vote based on popularity/front-running/incumbency instead. When removed from the equation, do those voting on race still matter...does the percentage change election by election or not?

There's lots of necessary regression analysis and significance testing that he did not undertake. Has Nate Silver not taught us anything?

This title sums up Liberals

By anon on Fri, 07/12/2013 - 11:04am.

You call conservative racist but base everything on race. Liberals = Racist! Fact!

Oh, bite me

By adamg on Fri, 07/12/2013 - 11:12am.

If you actually read Bernstein's piece, you'd see he starts out by saying this whole "of color" thing is probably irrelevant because Latinos and Asian-Americans may not have common cause with blacks.

But raising a question about identity politics is hardly racist, any more than asking whether Irish-Americans will vote for Candidate X or Jewish voters for Candidate Y.

Another example

By Kaz on Fri, 07/12/2013 - 1:13pm.

He says they do not have common cause...but then says the numbers will show what black people have been motivated by in voting. Well? Where are the numbers to prove that they don't have common cause? What if the Hispanic and Asian heavy districts ALSO vote the exact same way as he's claiming is special to the 30+ black heavy districts? That would undermine his assumption in the first paragraph and show that it *IS* a minority bloc that is voting together regardless of their reasons.

In fact, I would bet that Yoon's bounce up to #2 in the voting he shows results for from black voting is mirrored by a bounce up in Asian totals too. Did Yoon get a boost from blacks because they liked his message or because he was a minority candidate (just not as popular as Arroyo...who himself probably got a lot of Hispanic votes...which is mirrored in the black votes)?

It's just that I think his assumption is faulty and he doesn't analyze the data to prove his hypothesis true or false as to whether he's examining minority voting trends or black voting trends specifically with what specific data and limited analysis he's chosen to discuss...which makes the whole article somewhat uninspiring and incapable of justifying its headline.

Define racist

By Kaz on Fri, 07/12/2013 - 1:19pm.

Determining if people vote based on racial identities is not racist. If it is the case that a black person identifies with and would rather be led by a black person, particularly one that might even live in their neighborhood since this is a local election, then that would obviously effect your strategy if you were looking for which issues to make a part of your campaign or if you were trying to determine the odds of a particular candidate to win the election as a journalist.

However, conservatives have instituted rules that would impact more heavily on minorities, and only minutes after finding out they no longer have to account for their actions to the federal government (for now). That is racist. This article is about observation of past trends in voting and does not influence anyone's ability to vote or unfairly characterize them one way or another.

If you can't tell the difference between the legislative actions of conservatives and something like reporting on past trends in data, then you really need some help. If you can and you posted this anyways, then you're just a troll.