![]() |
|
Rubio gains ally in gambling fight | Main | Clues from C.W. »
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The comments to this entry are closed.
|
E-mail Times political editor Adam Smith:
|
Join Times Political Editor Adam Smith and Bay News 9 anchor Al Ruechel as they invite guests to discuss and debate the hot political topics making news, every Sunday on
Political Connections.
|
© 2009 · All Rights Reserved · St. Petersburg Times
490 First Avenue South · St. Petersburg, FL 33701 · 727-893-8111
Contact Us | Join Us | Advertise with Us | Subscribe to the Times
Privacy Policy | Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

Brickfield targeted the right pcts. I know I was told before hand.
St Pete Volunteer
Posted by: | November 08, 2007 at 05:29 PM
The thing that sticks out is the low turnout. I don't live in St. Pete, but if I'd come down there with my cousins to vote, we could have taken over St. Pete.
Posted by: | November 08, 2007 at 05:32 PM
Neil qiut blogging yourself..you think we're idiots?
Posted by: | November 08, 2007 at 05:55 PM
Two things:
1) In low-turn out elections, anything can happen.
2) Oh, the dangers of running a slate.
Baker's slate got hurt by each other's weaknesses and/or did not benefit from each other's strengths. The Firefighters, on the other hand, inflicted some damage on would-be winners.
Midtown voted independently perhaps because FF broke through, and Newton loosened the hold Faulkner may have delivered for other Baker candidates. (My one allotted snarky note: slapping literature on car windshields is aggressive littering, not targeted campaigning.)
Dudley carried Kersteen in Dist 3, making Polson's lead narrower than expected. Polson's focus on targeted precincts in the west, northeast, and Lakewood paid off and protected him from the fate of Monty and Faulkner.
Polson's popularity in the west did not carry Montanari in Dist 1. The west rewarded loyal Polson, and punished pro-development, pro-Baker, pro-establishment Monty and Faulkner.
Dudley made inroads in midtown, thanks to the Firefighters and perhaps riding on a Newton effect. Newton competed in the south, and Faulkner's precincts did not give him the margins he needed to win.
I'm sure there are other factors, too, but this is what jumped out as plausible...
Posted by: jus guessin' | November 08, 2007 at 09:25 PM
All these numbers prove is the beauty of logarithms and truncation is a Computerized Corporate Appointment Syst… err… I mean Computerized Voting System.
Posted by: | November 08, 2007 at 09:30 PM
Oh… and that Neil has one less bathroom to clean this week.
Posted by: | November 08, 2007 at 09:31 PM
I think the big loser that nobody has mentioned yet is Deveron Gibbons. As Baker's point man in the black community, he seems to have really dropped the ball.
Posted by: | November 09, 2007 at 08:29 AM
Deveron Gibbons had a bad night - Kersteen, Faulkner, Montanari.
Posted by: | November 09, 2007 at 09:15 AM
Yeah, Deveron's "plan" to trot in the mayor, expect people to roll over, vote for a criminal, and vote for New Election? There's a fine line between clever and stupid!
Posted by: | November 09, 2007 at 09:40 AM
Taking black support for granted- tsk tsk, Rick Baker. You were served.
Posted by: | November 09, 2007 at 09:42 AM