Election Day
People have been stopping me to ask who I think is going to take this City Council election. Normally, I have a reasonable idea about who has a chance and who doesn’t. This time, I must admit, I’m drawing an absolute blank. I haven’t the faintest idea because I believe almost anything could happen.
For one thing, there doesn’t seem to be a great deal of excitement about this race so I’m anticipating a low turnout. The last time there were two seats up, there were also several propositions on the ballot dealing with growth limitations, which brought a very high turnout to the polls. That time Sharon Barovsky beat Robert Roy van de Hoek. He ran much better than anyone had anticipated, but it was still a one-on-one race.
This time there are five candidates and that completely changes the equation. This means if there is a low turnout, say 30 percent to 35 percent, there will only be 3,000-plus voters casting a ballot out of 9,000 registered voters. With a smaller number of voters, and the results being split five ways, it becomes very difficult to predict the outcome. I’ve been told about people voting the strangest combinations.
A low turnout means that, primarily, the faithful turn out: The political junkies; the most opinionated; the least swayed by the campaigns; typically, those who are older; homeowners and those that have been in the community the longest.
All over the country that small segment in the center that shifts around from election to election almost always decides who wins. Frankly, Malibu is no different than the rest of the country.
I’m always astounded that there are people I know, who have strongly held opinions about the government, especially our local government, but never manage to get around to voting.
There is a dark and dirty secret about American politics. You either have to give money or vote, and preferably vote in groups. If you’re in neither of those categories, most politicians don’t give a damn what you think. Politicians are very practical people. Their universe consists of money givers, opinion shapers (like newspapers, of course) but most of all, probable voters. The best indicia of probable voters is whether or not they have voted in the past. If they didn’t vote in the last few municipal elections, they’re probably not going to vote in the next one, so why bother with them.
It also helps if a candidate has a good campaign. Watching all the local elections, I’ve come to the conclusion that, in a town as small as ours where you can practically meet every voter, a good campaign means a candidate and a small group of supporters who work very, very hard. The candidate who works the hardest frequently wins. That means standing outside the market, walking precincts, doing mailings and phone banks. So don’t get mad if you get several calls on Election Day. It’s really an honor. It means they believe you’re important.
Unfortunately, another part of a good campaign is letting people know who you are but at the same time trying to sound as reasonable as possible, even if you’re not very reasonable. That’s why every candidate moves toward the center in an election because the people who make the difference between winning and losing are always in the center.
In the national election I’ve heard it described as the 11 percent solution. The 11 percent of voters who vote, the probable voters, will invariably decide the race. I suspect Malibu isn’t very different.
So, by the time this paper comes out we’ll know the winners, and we can look back and test the hypothesis to see if those who worked the hardest won.