• Another comment

Toledo voters by the numbers

(My Nov 4, 2013 comment in a ToledoTalk.com thread about Toledo's mayoral election.)

---

"Toledoans are the sons and daughters of farmers, heavy manufacturing factory workers, all made of hard working stern stuff ..."

I don't understand what that has to do with anything, but for the record, Toledoans are also the sons and daughters of nurses, designers, chefs, accountants, etc. who also work very hard.

The rest of this post could be a bit numbers heavy.

For most Toledoans, none of this politics stuff matters much anyway, and that's probably okay.

It was no surprise that Toledo's voter turnout in the September 2013 primary was 15 percent.

I don't know what the expected turnout is in Toledo for tomorrow's election, but I'm guessing it will be around only 30 percent.

Since the September 2013 primary had a lower turnout than the September 2009 primary, then I assume the same will occur with the November 2013 general election.

Toledo's voter turnout in the November 2009 election was 34 percent, so that's why I'm guessing tomorrow's Toledo voter turnout will be 30 to 32 percent.

And since some eligible voters are not registered to vote, then more than 70 percent of Toledo's eligible voters will not participate in tomorrow's election. That seems to be the biggest message of all.

Apparently, Toledo has only about 160,000 registered voters.

According to the census, Toledo's 2010 population was 287,208. 24% of residents were under the age of 18.

In the 2010 census, 68,930 Toledoans were too young to vote.

That means 218,278 Toledoans were eligible to vote. Granted, Toledo's population has declined a bit more since the 2010 census, so the number of Toledoans eligible to vote today may be around 215,000, but only 160,000 are registered.

A difference of 55,000? That seems off.

25 percent of eligible Toledo voters are not even registered to vote. Really?

In September 2005, Toledo had 189,454 registered voters. And that number today is allegedly around 160,000. That rate of decline among registered voters is greater than Toledo's population decline. Maybe that's because most of the people leaving the city or dying off were registered voters, leaving behind a growing percentage of unregistered voters in Toledo. That probably does not matter, since most of the registered Toledo voters don't vote.

Most Toledoans do not care about the outcomes of elections.

For the September 2013 primary, the only cities that held elections in Lucas County were Toledo and Maumee. The Lucas County BOE reported a total number of registered voters for that day of: 164,645. Take away the Maumee voters, and I'm guessing the Toledo number is about 160,000 registered voters.

The turnout is measured against registered voters and not eligible voters.

Let's be optimistic and say Toledo will have a "high" turnout tomorrow of 35 percent.

35% * 160,000 = 56,000 Toledoans will vote tomorrow out of approximately 215,000 Toledoans who are eligible to vote. (That's a real turnout of 26 percent.)

In Toledo's November 2009 mayoral election, 67,000 votes were cast with a 34 percent turnout. But a 35 percent turnout tomorrow may only equal 56,000 voters. Huh? That seems like a large drop-off in only four years.

If Toledo's turnout is under 35 percent, then it's possible that the number of Toledoans voting tomorrow will be lower than the number of Toledoans who are eligible to vote but are not registered to vote.

Bizarre. But my arithmetic may be way off, since I've had no coffee today.

If 67,000 people voted in Toledo's November 2009 mayoral election, then I find it hard to believe that fewer than 60,000 votes will be cast in tomorrow's election. Maybe the Lucas County BOE's registered vote number is off. But I can't believe the BOE would make a mistake.

But if the numbers are correct, and my turnout prediction is correct, then only about 25 percent of Toledo's eligible voters will vote tomorrow.

For local media orgs trying to attract an audience, it might be best to ignore politics. On the other hand, it could be an opportunity for a small, startup media outlet to focus only on regional politics.

Another comment

(From my other Nov 4, 2013 comment in the same thread.)

---

Since my September choice, Opal, is not in the race, then I take a simpler approach to this decision process.

The Blade editorial board endorsed Collins.

Jack Ford endorsed Collins.

Allegedly, Carty Finkbeiner has helped Collins on this campaign.

With the Blade, JaFo, and Czarty backing Collins, then Collins is not an independent.

When a person irritates the Blade, JaFo, and Czarty, then that person is doing something right.

Toledo's future???

Collins has the support of three major destructive forces from Toledo's past. In case you forgot, those would be the Blade editorial board, Jack Ford, and Carty Finkbeiner.

That's not a future.

Easy choice: Mike Bell for Toledo Mayor.

---

"The blade link provided was to show the relative comparison between the two candidates in gross dollars received and spent."

So? Look back at the September 2013 primary. Sep 10, 2013 Blade story.

• Lopez raised $103,393
• Bell raised $91,010
• McNamara raised $90,296
• Collins raised only $10,267, but he finished second.

The financial differences between Bell and Collins in the general election is significantly lower than what Collins faced in the run-up to the primary.

The top four finishers in the September 2013 primary:

(I) Michael P. Bell	6340	27%
(I) D. Michael Collins	5806	24%
(D) Anita Lopez	5443	23%
(D) Joe McNamara	5328	22%

That's a lot of anti-Bell opposition. That's probably the reason why Bell has spent nearly all of his campaign money.

The Ohio Democrat Party 'supports' Collins, but the statewide party does not 'endorse' Collins. Politics.

Prior to the September primary, Ohio Democrat Chairman Chris Redfern 'identified defeating Mayor Bell as the party’s top goal for 2013.'

Democrats all over Ohio want to defeat Bell, eh?

From the Sep 27, 2013 Blade story :

“We will not coordinate with Mr. Collins’ campaign,” Mr. Redfern said. “We will communicate directly to registered Democrats in the city of Toledo about the importance of defeating Mike Bell.”

---

"This is our city to be run the way we see fit."

Fine. But how do you explain this statement that was posted above:

Prior to the September primary, Ohio Democrat Chairman Chris Redfern 'identified defeating Mayor Bell as the party’s top goal for 2013.'

The statewide political party's top goal was defeating Bell.

Redfern said:

“We will communicate directly to registered Democrats in the city of Toledo about the importance of defeating Mike Bell.”

Why is a statewide political party meddling with municipal politics? This is our business, right? Why is Toledo's mayoral election the business of Cleveland, Dayton, Youngstown, Zanesville? Answer: that's politics.

#toledo - #politics - #blog_jr