Lessons learned from the March judicial primary? -- part 2

For Part 1, click here.

3. Palm cards still work. Apparently. How's that for a bold beginning?

Here, in this small turnout election, there seems to have been relatively little "dropoff" (compared to other years, with highly contested races at the top of the ballot); that is, most of the people who came out to vote in the Democratic Primary voted all the way down the ballot, including in all the many judicial races.

That observation supports an inference that the voters who came to the polls knew what they intended to do before they left their homes. Therefore, one might suppose, palm cards would have little or no influence on these 'purpose' voters.

But a look inside the numbers suggests that this may not be the case.

In a comment to my post earlier this week, attorney Michael A. Strom suggested that the Tribune endorsements may have been the single most influential factor for many voters in the 8th Subcircuit (all the Tribune-endorsed candidates won their races there). Strom pointed out that Judge James L. Kaplan, a candidate for the 8th Subcircuit Cole vacancy (a race in which the area Democratic committeemen made no collective endorsement) was endorsed by the 48th Ward Democratic Party, and named on palm cards passed out by members of that organization -- and still finished behind Deputy Corporation Counsel John H. Ehrlich.

But, while it is true that Ehrlich took 1,238 votes in the 48th Ward to Kaplan's 797, Kaplan's vote total in 48 was his second highest in any of the wards comprising the 8th Subcircuit -- supporting an inference, at least, that palm cards helped -- but didn't help enough.

And there's more evidence supporting the continuing power of palm cards. I saw a number of references to a March 22 post on the Illinois Observer blog (now added to the sidebar), claiming that 33rd Ward Ald. and Committeeman Richard Mell decided to endorse Gregory Emmett Ahern, Jr. over Beatriz Santiago, the candidate slated by the area committeemen (and the winner of the primary), immediately before the primary.

David Ormsby, the author of the Observer post, was perhaps a trifle sarcastic about the last-minute switch:

According to the 33rd ward source, Ahern put a precinct worker in every precinct, paying each $100 for the day and delivering each lunch. It worked.

The workers ate Ahern’s lunch.

But, as Ormsby's post correctly points out, Ahern narrowly defeated Santiago in the 33rd Ward, 660 to 645. Ahern carried only one other ward, the 32nd, by a margin of 670 to 374. (I'm discounting the 29th Ward, where the one and only vote recorded went Ahern's way.)

I don't know who was on the palm cards, or if there were palm cards, in 32.

But I know who was on the palm cards in my own 41st Ward. The card passed out on behalf of 41st Ward Democratic Committeeman Mary O'Connor and organization president (and State Sen.) John G. Mulroe, departed from the official party slate by encouraging votes for Judge James M. McGing for the Cahill vacancy on the Appellate Court and for Gerald V. Cleary for the Simmons, Jr. vacancy on the Circuit Court.

Neither McGing nor Cleary won their races -- but they did very well in 41. Judge McGing garnered 1,988 votes in 41, comfortably ahead of officially-endorsed candidate Mathias W. Delort's 774. McGing got more votes in the 19th Ward (2,123) -- but there were over twice as many votes in 19 as in 41 in this race (9,914 to 4,403). In terms of percentage, McGing's best showing came in the 41st Ward.

The numbers for Cleary were even better. While there were other wards in which he got more votes (19 again, for example), Cleary's best percentage showing came in 41, where he compiled 61.72% of the votes over officially endorsed candidate Cynthia Ramirez.

I don't have palm cards from any other wards -- but there were other races in which some local influence seems to have been at work.

In the race for the countywide Ward vacancy, for example, which featured three sitting judges among the six candidates, Judge Alfred M. Swanson, Jr. was the officially endorsed candidate of the county Democratic Party. Yet in the 19th Ward, Judge Peter J. Vilkelis, got 2,586 votes to Swanson's 1,188. (Elizabeth Mary Hayes, who won the primary, beat both Swanson and Vilkelis in 19 as well, gathering 2,939 votes there.) On the other hand, Vilkelis did have the Tribune endorsement.

But if people were asked were to pick one ward in the City of Chicago where the Tribune endorsement would be least influential, the 13th Ward would probably be on most lists. Yet, in House Speaker Michael Madigan's 13th Ward, Vilkelis trounced all competitors, winning 3,586 votes (just over 3,000 more than Swanson, who had 578 votes; Hayes had 1,499 there). In the 14th Ward, Swanson managed only 237 votes (and Hayes 675), but Vilkelis got 974.

Maybe the few voters who came out on March 20 weren't "controlled" by the Democratic Party or looking for food baskets or garbage cans, but they sure seem to have been "influenced" by the requests of their local political organizations. Once again, Tip O'Neill is proved right: All politics is local.

The influence of palm cards presumably decreases as turnout increases -- but palm cards aren't obsolete yet.

4. I can never hope to make a living as a racetrack tout. I tried my hand at prognosticating in this election -- no, don't bother scrolling down looking for my predictions. I didn't publish them. But, before heading home on the 20th, I took my best, educated guesses about who would win the 27 contested Democratic primary judicial races. I didn't make guesses based on who I knew or liked personally. I tried to take my best shot at objectively predicting the winners. I got 15 of 27 right.

Not only will I not be hanging around the track, I will not be going to Vegas anytime soon.