If you really want Silverman to remain on the Council, don’t cast a 2nd vote

[Anonymous]

A bit of strategy at play here if you really want Silverman to be on the Council - don’t cast a 2nd vote for either Bonds or McDuffie. Right now the DC Machine is pushing both Bonds and McDuffie really hard. It’s essentially a 3-way race and only two can win. Lots of people will be voting McDuffie-Bonds.

Therefore, if your top candidate is Silverman, do not give a vote to either of the other two that can potentially bump her off. I didn’t like any of the remaining candidates, so I only cast one vote in the at-large race. Alternatively, you can toss your 2nd vote to one of the low likelihood candidates.

[Anonymous]

I hope she is off the council, so thanks for the advice.

[Anonymous]

I want Bonds off the council more than I want Silverman specifically to win. So I voted Silverman and McDuffie on the premise that more votes for the two of them is the best path to getting Bonds out. Bonds is a weak, beatable incumbent; depriving her of votes and driving voting totals up for the two strongest competitors is the path to beating her.

If you really can't stand one or the other of Silverman or McDuffie, then voting for just one is great. Just don't vote for Bonds!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want Bonds off the council more than I want Silverman specifically to win. So I voted Silverman and McDuffie on the premise that more votes for the two of them is the best path to getting Bonds out. Bonds is a weak, beatable incumbent; depriving her of votes and driving voting totals up for the two strongest competitors is the path to beating her.

If you really can't stand one or the other of Silverman or McDuffie, then voting for just one is great. Just don't vote for Bonds!

OP here: fair enough, this is a decent strategy if you really dislike a particular candidate. Similarly, my strategy can be used effectively if you have a strong preference for one of Bonds or McDuffie.

Making two voting choices presents some odd incentives depending on what your preferences are (eg if you really love one candidate or passionately hate one candidate).

[Anonymous]

What if we really want her gone?

[Anonymous]

Anyone whose main priority is that Bonds lose will be disappointed no matter who wins the other seat — there’s almost no way the Dem nominee won’t win a citywide election. I would prefer Silverman and McDuffie to Bonds, but she’s not going to lose.

[Anonymous]

I accuse OP of playing politics with politics.

Not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing, but I maintain my thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I accuse OP of playing politics with politics.

Not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing, but I maintain my thought.

what does this even mean?

[Anonymous]

People need to come to grips with the fact that Bonds isn't losing. Anyone who thinks she will has a profound misunderstanding of how DC politics work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People need to come to grips with the fact that Bonds isn't losing. Anyone who thinks she will has a profound misunderstanding of how DC politics work.

But she’s old and doesn’t ride an e-bike!

[Anonymous]

I’m the PP who wants Bonds to lose, and while I agree that it’s unlikely, she got only 36% of the vote in the primary. I suspect a lot of Democrats (like me) will not vote for her in the general and that it will be closer than people think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who wants Bonds to lose, and while I agree that it’s unlikely, she got only 36% of the vote in the primary. I suspect a lot of Democrats (like me) will not vote for her in the general and that it will be closer than people think.

And “close” only counts in horseshoes. She will still win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who wants Bonds to lose, and while I agree that it’s unlikely, she got only 36% of the vote in the primary. I suspect a lot of Democrats (like me) will not vote for her in the general and that it will be closer than people think.

And “close” only counts in horseshoes. She will still win.

And if people used both votes instead of undervoting, she might lose. Silverman and McDuffie are both Independents-in-name-only and well-known enough to do it. But people are so focused on the idea that Bonds can’t lose that they’re missing a real chance to actually beat her.

[Anonymous]

I had the same strategy as you, OP.

Bonds isn’t losing. I don’t hate McDuffie, but I prefer Silverman. So I only voted for her.

For those asking what to do if you really want Bonds gone… that will have to be done in the primary. So, start thinking about who you’d rather see win the D nom next time.

[Anonymous]

I would like my neighborhood to not be open warfare. Who should I vote for that acknowledges the problem?