 |
| Chicago's next mayor? |
Not
that it’s all too clear who the people are leaning toward at this point. One of
the drawbacks of a 14-candidate field for mayor where “undecided” is leading
everybody else is that it’s not all as clear as the polls would have us
believe.
THE
LATEST POLLS may well show Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle and one-time
White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley as the top two vote-getters. But they’re
not dominant.
There’s
always the chance that the “margin for error” factor that is inherent in polls is
undercutting someone else to the point where they may wind up being amongst the
top two candidates once the votes are actually counted. The very reason why the
old cliché about the “only poll that matters is the one on Election Day” is
ever so true.
There’s
also the confusion of the early voting process that theoretically gives
somebody a chance to have a head start on building their base for Election Day.
But
until Monday, all early voting took place at the downtown offices of the
Chicago Board of Election Commissioners. Anybody who wanted to cast their vote
already had to take a trip downtown – and I’m not sure how many people are that
politically motivated.
ACTUALLY
I DO know. It’s 1,762.
 |
| The so-called 'frontrunners' … |
That’s
the number of people who went to the early voting center during the past couple
of weeks. That figure is bound to get a significant boost in the next few days,
as now is the point in which an early voting center will open up in each of the
city’s 50 wards.
But
it may also be a time period in which confusion reigns. As in one in which the
lack of a clear front-runner will make people inclined to wait until the last
minute before deciding just who it is they’d like to see become the successor
to Rahm Emanuel as mayor.
Why
rush into things, many may think? They may wind up voting for a ‘loser’!
 |
| … for a spot in April 2 run-off |
AND
BY LOSER, I don’t mean someone who didn’t get the most votes. I mean someone
who may later turn out to be totally incompetent for the mayoral post.
What
I personally am trying to figure out is just how much of the ‘undecided’ vote
will remain undecided enough to not bother casting a ballot.
I
don’t doubt municipally-minded voters will believe this is an excessively
important office for which to cast a ballot. But I also wonder how many people
will come to the conclusion that none of the 14 are worthy of their vote.
How
many are going to feel contempt for the concept of having to vote for the least-inept
mayoral candidate available? How many will decide it’s just not worth their
time or effort to show up – either at an early voting center or at their
polling place come Feb. 26?
IN
WHICH CASE, it may wind up being that all 14 candidates will get a slight boost
in the poll percentages that show them all basically piled up on top of each
other in terms of voter support.
 |
| How loud will Enyia scream IF she falls short? |
It
means that the Feb. 26 election is likely to produce a result with some
two-thirds of Chicagoans casting votes for someone other than the two who
qualify for an April 2 run-off.
Which
means the ultimate factor in deciding who will become Chicago’s next mayor may
wind up being the candidate whom somebody could support as their compromise
pick, if their preferred candidate can’t get enough voter support.
This
may well be the election cycle where being second-best in the minds of voters
two weeks from now will have the end result of being the person who gets to
take the oath of office come May.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment