Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Cheshire election history: Vote total averages among boards

I wasn't sure what I wanted to represent with the BOE and PZC. It's not uncommon for either party to run only two -- or even just one -- candidate for either of these two boards. Complicating the review of PZC election results is the fact that much of the history does not indicate if PZC candidates were for six, four or two year terms.

If it's an election for a partial term, it's usually a one-on-one race. Such races have different results from at-large races. As such, I concluded that I wasn't going to be able to find any useful trends in the BOE and PZC election results. Nonetheless, I did wonder about one thing...

For which board are people most likely to cast ballots? Do some people vote for Council at-large, then "blank" PZC at-large?

The following graph is an indication of the average amount of votes cast for each board (Council, BOE & PZC), regardless of party:Based on this graph, it appears that the board with the most stability in votes is the Council. Often receiving more votes than the Council, but in a relatively volatile fashion, is the BOE. And generally voters cast the fewest ballots for PZC. The one major exception to PZC happened in 2011. That's probably a result of the GOP running only one six year candidate: Woody Dawson.

For reference, I've added the results for 1979 to 2011 here. You should see spreadsheet tabs near the bottom of the screen. As well, when you look at the PZC tab, you should look at Column C. This was my best guess as to the office for which each candidate was running. Sometimes the office was noted in the Election Records. But at other times, no indication was given about the particular seat. For example, 1999 saw nine Republicans running for various PZC seats. Three of those seats were PZC alternates, but the records I reviewed gave no clear indication about the other six candidates and whether they were running for six, four or two year terms.

Hope you find the BOE and PZC election results interesting!

Tim White

No comments: