NYC Mayor/2021 Megathread

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

My city and state completely sucks at conducting elections. We should be embarrassed. There needs to be a MAJOR overhaul of the NYCBOE immediately.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Ok wait the numbers seem completely f**ked.

https://twitter.com/aaronfoldenauer/status/1409976473977557003?s=20


Someone noted above that the minor candidates were having extremely high exhaust rates. If that’s caused by these phantom votes than they may actually not be factoring into the final round count, meaning the current final round is accurate. If not...oh boy.

So while the inclusion of a bunch of dummy voters is indeed a massive screw up, I believe the elimination of 3 candidates in round 8 is correct.

There are situations in RCV tabulation where it is possible to eliminate multiple candidates simultanously.  In this situation, the combined votes of the 5th, 6th, and 7th place candidates were neither enough to give any candidate a majority, nor were they enough to allow any lower candidate to leapfrog the 4th place candidate.  Therefore, regardless of how the 7th-5th place votes were distributed, the top 4 candidates were going to remain the same, so there is no reason not to eliminate the bottom 3 at the same time.

[Oryxslayer]

Credit to Cinyc for the map. Basically, Wasserman earlier was banging his drum about a potential 100K uncounted vote, mainly in the Bronx. His most recent tweet references how turnout there is basically stagnant whereas it went up by over 10% (on 2013, the last competitive election) in other boroughs. However, he may have simply stumbled into a confluence of trends most prevalent in areas with large minority populations like the Bronx. These are:

- Off-cycle elections generally being biased in favor of higher-income and higher-education demographics.

- Perceived Partisan threats most impact those demographics already highly engaged, so the natural turnout increase from increasing polarization is unequal.

- More candidates directly appealing to said demographics, once again raising interest and turnout among different subsections of those populations, whereas Adams was the only horse in town for African Americans and certain Hispanic demographics.

- The exit of a percentage of Hispanics from the democratic primary electorate. These may be the partisan flippers who went GOP in November, or they may have just left the primary ecosystem because candidates don't appeal to them. However, this has been going on for a while. I first noticed it in summer 2020 when doing Texas primary analysis and saw how despite Presidential turnout surging - sometimes more than doubling because of partisanship, competition, and the large candidate pool - the Rio Grande counties barely moved and turnout barely increased. My theory was that conservative-but-didn't-vote-GOP-because-perceived-racism Hispanics are no longer in the pool of primary voters, leaving the resulting overall primary pool more to the left than previously.



In an unrelated note, the traditionally ultra Orthodox neighborhoods really stand out when it comes to turnout increases.

[wbrocks67]

I have no idea why they decided to release the result this way.  It seems to me they should first
a) count the absentee ballots once all of them are cured and then release the combined first round results then
b) do the round by round RCV and then release the results

it is not clear that the sequence of candidates being eliminated would be same once you add in the absentee ballots so this entire exercise  is a waste of time

I agree. They should have waited until after the curing deadline and only released RCV results the week of Jul 12.

However, people who dont understand the reason for the delay would be yammering away about how it takes so long to count.

Yeah, it doesn't really make sense to release any RCV numbers before the total initial account (early + in person + election day + absentee) are all accounted for.

Also, why are we not getting absentee #s for another week? Wtf is this weekly rollout thing they are doing?

[Lambsbread]

This has to be the dumbest election since the Iowa Caucus.

[jaichind]

Yeah, it doesn't really make sense to release any RCV numbers before the total initial account (early + in person + election day + absentee) are all accounted for.

Also, why are we not getting absentee #s for another week? Wtf is this weekly rollout thing they are doing?

I think it is because of the NY dumb rule that they have to give people a chance to cure their absentee ballot before releasing the results.  My take is even if you want a long timeframe for people to cure their ballots there is no reason not to count and release all absentee ballots that do not need to be cured (which has to be 99% of them).  Delaying releasing those results just make people think you have something to hide.

[Crumpets]

https://twitter.com/fordm/status/1410082046794473482

[n1240]

Seems like Garcia is extremely likely to win considering the issue with the results produced by the BOE yesterday didn't really affect the late round preference flows that much, only erroneously added a bunch of single preference votes to all of the candidates. Garcia needs to win the last round absentee vote by 8-10%, depending on absentee rejection rate and how many election day/provisional votes have not yet been tabulated, which seems pretty easy based on how well Garcia did in the early vote. Based on the preference flows, here is roughly how the election day and early vote last round went:

Election Day:

Adams 53.1%
Garcia 46.9%
Non-Exhausted votes: ~525k

Early Vote:

Garcia 56.6%
Adams 43.3%
Non-Exhausted votes: ~165k

So essentially the case for Adams winning now seems to be that he does better relative to Garcia on absentee votes than the early vote.

For anyone interested and can't find the early vote data, here are the numbers I used for early vote from taking the results from the BOE page shortly after polls closed, thus assuming all of these votes were just early votes.

[Alben Barkley]

Wasserman seems convinced that the Bronx is being underreported/undercounted:

https://twitter.com/redistrict/status/1410124165663924228?s=21

https://twitter.com/redistrict/status/1410116699601440771?s=21

https://twitter.com/redistrict/status/1410102924567527424?s=21

If Garcia catches up, it will be pretty easy for Adams to pull a “Stop the Steal!” thanks to the BOE’s incompetence.

[Lambsbread]

Dave is trying really hard to compensate for the fact that he thought Adams was going to win.

[Alben Barkley]

Dave is trying really hard to compensate for the fact that he thought Adams was going to win.

Seems to me that Dave is analyzing the data he has in front of him as well as ever. Not his fault the NYC BOE is such a clusterf—k. And Adams very well still could win. Anyone who says otherwise based on some extremely faulty and erroneously released data is kidding themselves.

[wbrocks67]

Dave is trying really hard to compensate for the fact that he thought Adams was going to win.

Seems to me that Dave is analyzing the data he has in front of him as well as ever. Not his fault the NYC BOE is such a clusterf—k. And Adams very well still could win. Anyone who says otherwise based on some extremely faulty and erroneously released data is kidding themselves.

Correct me if I'm wrong though, but wasn't the missing Bronx data included in yesterday's erroneous dump?

There was 142k ballots added. 135k were the dummy test ones, and 7K were reportedly those missing Bronx votes. So technically weren't they already added yesterday?

[wbrocks67]

Dave is trying really hard to compensate for the fact that he thought Adams was going to win.

this.

[Sir Mohamed]

Dave is trying really hard to compensate for the fact that he thought Adams was going to win.

So he actually isn't that likely to win? Would be glorious, Adams seems to be a mini-Cuomo.

[Lambsbread]

Dave is trying really hard to compensate for the fact that he thought Adams was going to win.

So he actually isn't that likely to win? Would be glorious, Adams seems to be a mini-Cuomo.

It's still possible Adams could win, but this just goes to show that trying to extrapolate sweeping conclusions from initial vote dumps in an RCV election is useless.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Dave is trying really hard to compensate for the fact that he thought Adams was going to win.

Seems to me that Dave is analyzing the data he has in front of him as well as ever. Not his fault the NYC BOE is such a clusterf—k. And Adams very well still could win. Anyone who says otherwise based on some extremely faulty and erroneously released data is kidding themselves.

Correct me if I'm wrong though, but wasn't the missing Bronx data included in yesterday's erroneous dump?

There was 142k ballots added. 135k were the dummy test ones, and 7K were reportedly those missing Bronx votes. So technically weren't they already added yesterday?

I’m assuming that this is the case, and people have been pointing this out to Dave but he hasn’t addressed it yet lol.

[n1240]

Dave is trying really hard to compensate for the fact that he thought Adams was going to win.

Seems to me that Dave is analyzing the data he has in front of him as well as ever. Not his fault the NYC BOE is such a clusterf—k. And Adams very well still could win. Anyone who says otherwise based on some extremely faulty and erroneously released data is kidding themselves.

Correct me if I'm wrong though, but wasn't the missing Bronx data included in yesterday's erroneous dump?

There was 142k ballots added. 135k were the dummy test ones, and 7K were reportedly those missing Bronx votes. So technically weren't they already added yesterday?

Not sure if it was mentioned in this thread yet, but the erroneous test votes lined up very well with ballot order, here were the new round one votes received in the report produced yesterday by ballot order:

Foldenauer: 2492
Morales: 3171
Stringer: 4356
McGuire: 5002
Wiley: 9633
Prince: 7043
Chang: 8282
Garcia: 11633
Adams: 17598
Wright: 11616
Donovan: 13190
Yang: 16550
Taylor: 15079
Write-in: 16180

The only four out of the place are the candidates who received more than 10% of the vote overall, so it seems plausible that they were adding thousands of votes to each candidate in the test data, incrementing by a thousand going downwards in ballot order, so it makes sense there were a number of actual votes added to the total, with Adams doing the best which makes sense considering the votes were probably disproportionally from Bronx

[Oryxslayer]

Dave is trying really hard to compensate for the fact that he thought Adams was going to win.

Seems to me that Dave is analyzing the data he has in front of him as well as ever. Not his fault the NYC BOE is such a clusterf—k. And Adams very well still could win. Anyone who says otherwise based on some extremely faulty and erroneously released data is kidding themselves.

Correct me if I'm wrong though, but wasn't the missing Bronx data included in yesterday's erroneous dump?

There was 142k ballots added. 135k were the dummy test ones, and 7K were reportedly those missing Bronx votes. So technically weren't they already added yesterday?

I’m assuming that this is the case, and people have been pointing this out to Dave but he hasn’t addressed it yet lol.

For reference, Cinyc created the previously posted map to show Dave that his assumption that there were 100Kish outstanding E-Day votes is faulty. The assumption might make sense purely from a topline perspective, but upon examination of the precinct data it looks more like Hispanic turnout rather than an undercount was a problem. It looks very likely that the 7K added yesterday alongside the dummies was the last E-Day votes. Dave however has kept huffing the Copium because he doesn't want to have to delete more tweets like he has already done.

https://twitter.com/cinyc9/status/1410106336029908997?s=20

[wbrocks67]

Which seems to mean that in the end, when the 135K votes are deleted, it really won't change the general trajectory of the race that we saw yesterday and that Adams/Garcia will likely still be close in the final 2 again.

[beaver2.0]

Please revoke New York's statehood until they can run a fair election.

[Lognog]

If there is a bunch of uncounted ballots in the Bronx doesn't that likely mean Adams wins?

[Tintrlvr]

If there is a bunch of uncounted ballots in the Bronx doesn't that likely mean Adams wins?

“A bunch” here means maybe 10,000 at most but possibly a lot fewer. Which would help him a bit but wouldn’t guarantee a victory. And they may have already been counted in yesterday’s totals since yesterday had 135k extra test ballots AND 7k other extra ballots (likely the missing votes).

[Oryxslayer]

If there is a bunch of uncounted ballots in the Bronx doesn't that likely mean Adams wins?

Yes. But there very likely isn't on the level he imagines. Dave is huffing Copium born from a misunderstanding of demographic turnouts and how said demographics dominate the Bronx. See the map for why this is happening. See the tweet on how many precincts remain uncounted (normal for NY), how they are equitably divided across the boroughs, and how the 7K added yesterday alongside the dummys are likely those remaining precincts.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1410292229202194436

[Crumpets]

https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1410218644546719744

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1410292229202194436

I don't think this really tells us much unless we know where exactly those precincts are. Are they on college campuses or the site of a recently-demolished housing project? Or are they in an area that is demographically pretty much the same as 4 years ago?