One last look at the early voting numbers

Here is a copy of that Johnston report I’ve been referring to, updated through the end of early voting. A few things to note.

– The total number of people who voted in the City of Houston election through the end of early voting is 63,560, which is really not that much different that the 62,641 that showed up early in November. Actually, that latter number is a bit inflated, since it includes all mail ballots collected through Election Day; ultimately, the 63,560 figure above will climb by a few hundred as the stragglers arrive at the County Clerk’s office. Still, my point remains that either you believe the December voters have voted early in a higher proportion as the November voters as has been the case in the last three city runoffs, or you believe that this runoff is different and the proportion will be different as well. How you project final turnout is closely related to that belief.

– Sadly, I cannot provide any information about the 2001 runoff. According to the response I got from the County Clerk’s office, they just don’t have the early voting numbers from 2001. Annoying, and a bit weird, but that’s the way it goes.

– The D/R ratio among early voters is 61/28. That is the strongest factor in favor of Ronald Green and Jolanda Jones. Barring a Republican surge on Runoff Day, if they can hold Democratic voters, they ought to win.

– The female to male ratio among early voters was 55-45, with the split among voters who hadn’t participated in November being even more pronounced at 59-41. That strikes me as being favorable to Annise Parker, as the crosstabs from that Zogby poll showed that her lead came entirely from an advantage among women.

– The percentage of African-American voters who had not voted in November is slightly higher than overall, at 33-29. That’s favorable to Gene Locke, though it’s not that big a deal. Look at it this way: Of the 10,250 new voters, 3382 were African-American. Had this pool of voters looked the same as the whole thing, that number would be 2972. Assuming they go for Locke at an 80-20 clip, which given that Parker got 20% A-A support in the Zogby poll isn’t unreasonable, and he nets 2030 votes in the actual sample versus 1784 in a 29% A-A sample. That’s a pickup of 246 votes total, which seems unlikely to be a difference-maker. Of course, a surge on Saturday and it’s a different story. We’ll see how it goes.

I think I’m mostly numbered out till after the election. Hope you found these posts useful.

Related Posts:

This entry was posted in Election 2009 and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to One last look at the early voting numbers

  1. martha says:

    Great analysis, Charles! Thanks for doing this. The only thing I would say about Ron Green is that the results from Round 1 showed MJ Khan got a lot of Democratic votes. Do we think Green has done enough, for example, through mail, to remind voters he (Green) is the the Democrat in the race?

  2. That’s the big question. I really hope so, but I don’t know.

  3. John says:

    Why do you hope that a tax cheat wins? I thought he was going to settle this dispute? Ron Green is about as intelligent as a pear

  4. CG says:

    Yes, thanks Charles for doing this. Interesting reading.

    The only mailer I saw from Ron Green was yesterday, and it was not to remind voters that he was the Dem, but rather to remind voters that MJ Khan is the Pakistani and Muslim in the race. I am waiting for the liberal outrage at his racism and religious intolerance. I am sure it is coming any day now.

  5. Burt Levine says:

    Yes to Martha, Charles and CG I did see a Ronald (what he prefers being called) mailer that did identify him as the Democrat endorsed by every endorsing Democrat leaning org and contrasting him with Masrur Javed Khan the Republican Primary voter, contributor & ideologue that is endorsed by every endorsing Republican leaning organization.

  6. CG says:

    So Ronald Green goes out of his way to emphasize the following about MJ Khan:

    Masrur Javed Khan
    Pakistan Association of Greater Houston, President
    Islamic Society of Greater Houston, Director

    How is that different from publicizing that a candidate has been endorsed by the Houston GLBT PAC? Or emphasizing that his name is Barack Hussein Obama?

    (Don’t get me wrong — I vote for about 50-75% of the GLBT endorsed folks. It doesn’t affect me one way or the other. Oh yeah, voted for Obama, too.)

  7. houtopia says:


    If you read the Green mailer, you would see that Mr. Khan’s affiliation with those organizations was mentioned only in the context of being sued for conflict of interest and mismanaging funds — both of which are relevant to his claim of being the only candidate suitable to serve as the City’s CFO.

    Don’t try to hide behind some other issue and obfuscate the substance behind the piece.

  8. Pingback: KHOU/KUHF poll gives Parker a big lead – Off the Kuff

  9. CG says:

    I say BS to houtopia —

    There would be no way that the Green mailer would mention the Khan affiliations if he was President of the Houston Engineers Society and the American Cancer Association. No way.

    You know Green is playing the anti-Muslim and anti-Middle Eastern game here. He wants the vote of the haters. Just because he is being a bit subtle, you can’t hide the fact that Green is playing the same game that Democrats always (and rightly!!!) call out Republicans for.

    You, houtopia, are a hypocrite (assuming you are a good Democrat).

  10. Mainstream says:

    Houtopia’s response is absurd. Of course , this is a mildly racist attack. Holm sent out a similar card, just mentioning the opponent by full, ethnically identifiable name, which I thought was out of line. This is even more egregious.

    To be fair, use of the full name of an opponent is a time-honored political attack technique. George Herbert Walker Bush made a point of referring to “Pete” Dupont by his formal name, “Pierre” in the 1988 GOP primary debate held here in Houston.

  11. houtopia says:

    Keep telling yourself that, CG. Read the lawsuit.

  12. CG says:

    Houtopia, you are supporting a racist and a bigot. The fiduciary duty attack could have been done without mentioning the names of the two organizations. Green could care less what the lawsuit is about. He just wants to make the Pakistani and Muslim points.

    And anyone can file a lawsuit and claim anything. A judgment I care about — a lawsuit means nothing. I could copy those words and file them against you.

    Green is going down, and so is bigotry and intolerance. You keep doing your part to keep those evil movements going, though, houtopia, and have fun looking in the mirror.

Comments are closed.