jsteele
Post 04/17/2013 12:08     Subject: Re:Bonds vs Mara?
There are also corporate or union funded independent expenditure efforts supporting Mara and Bonds. You can debate who between Frumin and Silverman is most pure with regard to funding -- both can make a solid argument -- but both are in different worlds than Mara and Bonds.
Anonymous
Post 04/17/2013 12:06     Subject: Bonds vs Mara?
This is just another metric, but it is interesting:

http://sunlightfoundation.com/feature/dc-campaign-finance/

Silverman: no corporate monies, but a pretty significant amount raised outside of DC

Bonds: Corporate money and other money

Frumin: Significant monies raised within DC, some corporate money

Mara: PACs and other support
Anonymous
Post 04/16/2013 15:42     Subject: Bonds vs Mara?
Am starting to lean toward Silverman. Met her at the metro and was impressed with her, although, I think she did not come off as well as she should have in the WAMU debate. Also, Colbert King, whom I respect, complimented her in his recent column:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/colbert-king-race-doesnt-belong-in-dc-council-election/2013/04/12/a76621a8-a378-11e2-82bc-511538ae90a4_story.html

It's still hard to know. I do not like Mara or Bonds though so I'm not going to vote for one in order to block the other. If I go for a protest vote, I'll vote for Zukerberg because I support the legalization of marijuana. I guess what I need to see now is whether Silverman has a chance of winning, which it appears is a possibility based on this most recent poll. Next few days will determine a lot for me.
takoma
Post 04/16/2013 14:02     Subject: Re:Bonds vs Mara?
jsteele wrote:
takoma wrote:Based on this poll, the 2011 special election, and general feelings, my guess is that either Frumin or Silverman has a very low chance of winning as the race stands, maybe 5 or 10%. That's chance of winning, not percentage of vote. If one pulled out (quickly) and endorsed the other, I think the remaining one would have support pretty close to Bonds and Mara, so they'd have nearly equal chances to win, say 30%. If the two were to do a coin toss to choose one to drop out, they would have equal chances to get that 30% probability, so each would have a 15% chance. From a strategic point of view, the coin toss is a better strategy for each of them, and I think they are nuts not to do it.

The factor I am omitting, of course, is the public's reaction, especially their supporters. Would people see it as an indication that they were not serious, or would most people understand it as a reasonable move by each one of them to enhance the probability of election?

Or do you all just think I'm nuts?


I'm a bit shocked that you would base this post on the poll which had Silverman and Mara tied.

As I've said before in this thread, I think the suggestion that this is a "Bonds vs Mara" election is a fallacy. Of course Bonds and Mara want you to believe this because it suits their purposes. Of course the Washington Post -- which has endorsed Mara in four elections -- wants you to believe this because it fits its purpose as well.

It is also a mistake to read too much into the 2011 election. In 2011, Mara did not face strong opposition in Ward 3. He received nearly half the votes in that ward -- 4091. That's out of a total of 11851 votes he received city-wide. Frumin could easily take a large chunk out of that. Really, for Mara to have any chance at all, he needs voters to abandon Frumin. Hence, the constant flow of anti-Frumin posts in this forum originating in the Mara camp.

If you wanted to portray the election as Bonds vs Frumin-Mara-Silverman (just putting the names alphabetical) I might agree. But, I don't believe there is sufficient evidence to declare this a Bonds vs. Mara election. So, any coin toss needs to include Mara.

I don't put a lot of weight on that poll, and I don't see it as Bonds vs Mara. But I don't entirely ignore the poll, which actually argues against it being Bonds vs Mara. The main reason I left Mara out is that I figured that he, as the only Republican, would be unlikely to negotiate with two Dems, while I see Silverman and Frumin competing for the same "progressive" vote. Mathematically, though, there might well be other combinations that would work, including a Bonds/Frumin/Silverman/Zukerberg coin toss Dem primary. However, that would give each at most a 25% shot at the win, and Bonds is probably higher than that now.

I have not been through all combinations, and it's probably not worth it since my initial probability estimates are really not much more than guesses. To be honest, the Frumin/Silverman combo may be motivated mostly by the fact that I happen to be wavering mostly between those two, and it looks to me that it would actually be a win-win for them as well as helping me decide my vote.
jsteele
Post 04/16/2013 12:58     Subject: Re:Bonds vs Mara?
takoma wrote:Based on this poll, the 2011 special election, and general feelings, my guess is that either Frumin or Silverman has a very low chance of winning as the race stands, maybe 5 or 10%. That's chance of winning, not percentage of vote. If one pulled out (quickly) and endorsed the other, I think the remaining one would have support pretty close to Bonds and Mara, so they'd have nearly equal chances to win, say 30%. If the two were to do a coin toss to choose one to drop out, they would have equal chances to get that 30% probability, so each would have a 15% chance. From a strategic point of view, the coin toss is a better strategy for each of them, and I think they are nuts not to do it.

The factor I am omitting, of course, is the public's reaction, especially their supporters. Would people see it as an indication that they were not serious, or would most people understand it as a reasonable move by each one of them to enhance the probability of election?

Or do you all just think I'm nuts?


I'm a bit shocked that you would base this post on the poll which had Silverman and Mara tied.

As I've said before in this thread, I think the suggestion that this is a "Bonds vs Mara" election is a fallacy. Of course Bonds and Mara want you to believe this because it suits their purposes. Of course the Washington Post -- which has endorsed Mara in four elections -- wants you to believe this because it fits its purpose as well.

It is also a mistake to read too much into the 2011 election. In 2011, Mara did not face strong opposition in Ward 3. He received nearly half the votes in that ward -- 4091. That's out of a total of 11851 votes he received city-wide. Frumin could easily take a large chunk out of that. Really, for Mara to have any chance at all, he needs voters to abandon Frumin. Hence, the constant flow of anti-Frumin posts in this forum originating in the Mara camp.

If you wanted to portray the election as Bonds vs Frumin-Mara-Silverman (just putting the names alphabetical) I might agree. But, I don't believe there is sufficient evidence to declare this a Bonds vs. Mara election. So, any coin toss needs to include Mara.