Precinct analysis: At Large #3

Only one candidate running for citywide office won outright in November. That candidate was first term CM Michael Kubosh in At Large #3. Here’s how he won:

Dist  Kubosh   LaRue  McElligott  Peterson
A      8,782   1,042         835     3,152
B      8,988   1,526       1,251     3,541
C     16,414   2,314       1,409    10,138
D     12,074   1,599       1,367     4,385
E     15,033   1,249       1,217     5,314
F      4,192     973         819     2,274
G     19,632   1,463       1,069     5,433
H      6,149   1,284         925     3,055
I      5,121   1,057         953     2,567
J      3,230     600         492     1,566
K      8,524   1,271         989     4,283
A     63.59%   7.54%       6.05%    22.82%
B     58.72%   9.97%       8.17%    23.13%
C     54.22%   7.64%       4.65%    33.49%
D     62.16%   8.23%       7.04%    22.57%
E     65.90%   5.47%       5.33%    23.29%
F     50.76%  11.78%       9.92%    27.54%
G     71.14%   5.30%       3.87%    19.69%
H     53.88%  11.25%       8.10%    26.77%
I     52.80%  10.90%       9.83%    26.47%
J     54.86%  10.19%       8.36%    26.60%
K     56.57%   8.44%       6.56%    28.43%
CM Michael Kubosh

CM Michael Kubosh

There’s not a whole lot to say here. Kubosh won a majority in every Council district, only coming close to not having a majority in District F. Some of this is a perk of high name ID, but said name ID was earned through work on the red light camera referendum and by being visible on Council. There have been a lot more people running for At Large seats in recent elections, challenging incumbents as well as piling up in open seat races. Since 2009, when CM Melissa Noriega ran unopposed, two At Large members have been dislodged, and every At Large incumbent save Steve Costello and Brad Bradford in 2013 have had at least two opponents. Sue Lovell and Jolanda Jones survived runoffs in 2009, while David Robinson and Jack Christie face them this year. In that context, Kubosh’s achievement as one of only two At Large incumbents to clear 60% against multiple opponents in this time frame (Bradford in 2011 is the other) is even more impressive. Give the man his due.

With all this recent interest in At Large races, and with the next election being four long years away (barring any further intervention from the Supreme Court), one wonders what the landscape will look like the next time these seats are up. As noted once before, CM Christie is the only At Large member whose term would be up in 2019, meaning that if he loses then every citywide officeholder as of January 2, 2016, can be on the ballot in 2019. (Like CM Kubosh, CM Robinson is in his first term, so regardless of the outcome in At Large #2, the incumbent in that seat can run for re-election.) With four years between races, one would think that there will be a lot of pent-up demand for Council offices, which may attract another truckload of citywide hopefuls. On the other hand, districts A, B, C, J (if CM Laster wins), and K will all be open then, so perhaps that will siphon off some of that demand. I really have no idea what it will be like, but barring anything strange, it seems reasonable to say that CM Kubosh will be a favorite to win a third term. Check back with me in January of 2019 and we’ll see how good that statement looks at that time.

Related Posts:

This entry was posted in Election 2015 and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Precinct analysis: At Large #3

  1. Paul Kubosh says:

    Nice coverage. Thank you.

    Go Coogs!

  2. Joshua ben bullard says:

    @kuffner-how can cm Christie’s term end in 2023 when he was first elected in 2011 for his first term?as of right now,Christie has served two -two year terms,if he wins the runoff then his term will end 2019?-not 2023?meaning cm Christies seat will run with everyone else 2019.

  3. Joshua – I meant to say “whose term would be up in 2019”. I’ve fixed it. Thanks for the catch.

  4. Let’s continue pretending…

    -We don’t know who I am or about my platform
    -Kubosh has a platform and understands basic public finance
    -That we don’t notice that Larue and I together took 1 in 7 votes, without money or endorsements.

    Can’t say I was impressed with the ‘landscape’ in regards to platforms.

    The only ‘perk’ to this election was pretending with voters that I didn’t know who they were and they didn’t know who I was.

  5. Pingback: Precinct analysis: At Large #3 | Take a Look in Debbies Window

  6. Pingback: Precinct analysis: At Large #4 – Off the Kuff

  7. PDiddie says:

    I like the cut of the McElligott fellow’s snark-gib.

    Ignoring Greens is just what Charles does, Joe. He does the same for the Libs. His world is a bipolar one (don’t take the truth too personally, C-man).

  8. I was not beingy snarky. Just direct.

    My comment was directed at everyone, not charles.

    The establishment democrats and republicans were and are still scared shitless of my platform.

Comments are closed.